8 views

Uploaded by qaiseriqbal

Bearing capacity, foundations

- Buildings on the Slope Considering Effects of Uneven Settlement of many Piles on the Structure Research.pdf
- C7 Deep foundation.pdf
- Design of Isolated Footing
- 2-INTRODUCTION Foundation ENGG.pdf
- test3
- pile-design.xls
- Subgroup C Report
- Chapter 5
- LatPilePY
- 3052_c000
- End Bearing Capcity of Pile Foundation
- FBPier manual
- Design of Pile Foundation
- 103552
- Step5-Lateral Capacity.pdf
- Bored Piling Pakubumi 2009 Mechanical
- Step5-Lateral_Capacity.pdf
- CEU313_CT2 (1)
- 104806455-Design-RCC-2-Storey-Building.pptx
- Bearing Capacity Factors

You are on page 1of 20

will reach a failure state and the footing may experience a bearing capacity

failure. The bearing capacity is the limiting pressure that the footing can

support.

Footing

The solutions presented below have been determined for the situation

where a footing sits on the soil surface. The effect of founding the footing

below the ground surface, as is common for most buildings, is introduced

by assuming that the soil above the footing applies a surcharge as shown

below

B

Q

Q qs = D

D

In making this assumption the effects of any restraint from the soil above

the base of the footing are ignored. This assumption is reasonable provided

that the depth of burial is not too great. To be considered as a shallow

foundation D/B should be less than 1.

bearing capacity.

the ground is found in equilibrium with the applied loads for which the

soil is everywhere in a state of failure. The solution is less than or equal

to the true collapse load.

postulated and the applied loads in equilibrium with the assumed failure

mechanism are determined. The solution is greater than or equal to the

true collapse load.

In the limit, when the mechanism and the stresses are consistent, the

two methods give the same solution.

Accurate solutions to the collapse loads (bearing capacity) are difficult to

determine when 0 and most of the charted solutions are not totally reliable.

Computerised methods for determining bounds to the collapse loads are now available and are

likely to be more widely used in the future.

Bearing capacity of a shallow strip footing (plane strain)

(not accurate) lower bound approach is considered below.

Footing

qf Surcharge qs

H

Soil at Soil at

state of state of

Active Passive

Failure with Frictionless Failure with

v > h Discontinui h > v

ty

When the soil is at a state of failure the Mohr-Coulomb criterion is satisfied,

and we have

1 N 3 2 c N

or

1 c cot

N

3 c cot

Underneath the footing the vertical stress will be greater than the

horizontal stress, that is v = 1 and h = 3, and in the limit these will be related by the

Mohr-Coulomb criterion. At any depth z the vertical stress is given by

v qf z

At failure

q f z c cot

N

h c cot

hence

1

h (q f z c cot ) c cot

N

In the region away from the footing the horizontal stress will be greater

than the vertical stress. At any depth z the vertical stress is given by

v qf z

and at failure

h c cot

N

q s z c cot

and

h N (q s z c cot ) c cot

For equilibrium the horizontal forces from the two failure zones must be

equal

H H

( h ) active dz

0

(0

)

h passive dz

which gives

1 H2 H2

N qf H 2

c cot H N q s H

2

c cot H

H 2

q f q s N 2

2

N 1 c cot N 2 1

This solution will give a lower bound to the true solution because of the

simplified stress distribution assumed in the soil. Nevertheless, similar

terms occur in all bearing capacity calculations. These terms relate to

the self weight of the soil

the effect of cohesion

The general bearing capacity formulae are therefore written in the following

form

B

qf qs Nq N c Nc

2

where the quantities Nq, N, and Nc are known as bearing capacity factors. For the shallow

bearing capacity problem values of these factors depend on and can be determined from the

chart produced by Terzaghi shown below (see also p 28 in Data Sheets)

BEARING CAPACITY THEORIES OF TERZAGHI AND SKEMPTON

40

N q N

30 Nc

(degrees)

20

10

0

60 50 40 30 20 10 0 20 40 60 80

N q and N c N

BEARING CAPACITY FACTORS [After Terzaghi and Peck (1948)]

Qf

1 B N

qf = + cN c + D f N q continuous footing

B 2

qf = 0.4 BN + 1.3cN c + D f N q square

qf = 0.6 RN + 1.3cN c + D f N q circular

q= D f Df

a

d

b

c

q ult = cN c

9

8

Nc

7 D

B

6

5.14

Nc (for rectangle)

5

0 1 2 3 4 5 = (0.84+0.16 B ) Nc (square)

L

D/B

L= Length of footing

qf = cN c + D

The mechanism analysed by Terzaghi is shown below. Note that it differs

from the simple problem analysed above by having a transition region

between the regions where the principal stresses are horizontal and

vertical.

BEARING CAPACITY THEORIES OF TERZAGHI AND SKEMPTON

40

Nq N

30 Nc

)

s

e

e

r 20

g

e

d

(

10

0

60 50 40 30 20 10 0 20 40 60 80

N q and N c N

BEARING CAPACITY FACTORS [After Terzaghi and Peck (1948)]

Qf

1 B

qf = 2 N + cN c + D f N q continuous footing

B

q f = 0.4 BN + 1.3cN c + D f Nq square

q f = 0.6 RN + 1.3cN c + D f N q circular

q= Df Df

a

d

b

Df

c

q ult = cN c

9

re

8 squa

le or

Circ

c

N 7 D

ous

Continu

B

6

5.14 Nc (for rectangle)

5

0 1 2 3 4 5 = (0.84+0.16 B ) Nc (square)

L

D/B

L= Length of footing

q f = cNc + D

The shape of the footing also influences the bearing capacity. This can be

allowed for by adjusting the terms in the bearing capacity equation.

B

For a continuous strip footing qf qs Nq N c Nc

2

For a square footing q f q s N q 0.4 BN 1.3 c N c

The analysis has been presented in terms of total stress. This can be used

to evaluate the short term undrained bearing capacity. To evaluate the long

term bearing capacity an effective stress analysis is required. This is very

similar to the total stress analysis considered above.

The soil is dry. The total and effective stresses are identical and the

analysis is identical to that described above except that the parameters

used in the equations are c, , dry rather than cu, u, sat. If the water table is

more than a depth of 1.5 B (the footing width) below the base of the

footing the water can be assumed to have no effect.

Q = qf B

qs = D

u = uo

Notation

These quantities are used because they give the variation of effective

stress with depth. For example under the footing the total vertical stress,

pore pressure and effective vertical stress at any depth z are

v qf z

u uo w z

v v u q f z

Following through the same analysis as before but using the effective stress

failure criterion which is given by

1 c cot

N

3 c cot

gives

H 2

q f q s N 2

2

N 1 c cot N 2 1

which can be more generally written as

B

q f q s N q N c N c

2

where the bearing capacity factors are identical to those given before. Note

that the total bearing capacity is qf and

qf = qf + uo

considered so far has accounted for

rate of loading (drained or undrained)

groundwater conditions (dry or saturated)

foundation shape (strip footing, square or circle)

Additional factors which also influence the capacity are

soil compressibility

embedment (D/B > 1)

inclined loading

eccentric loading

non-homogeneous soil

the conventional bearing capacity factors. Pages 74 and 75 of the Data

Sheets give formulae for some of these correction factors.

It should also be noted that pages 69 to 71 of the Data Sheets give more

(theoretically) accurate bearing capacity factors. However, in practice the

Terzaghi factors are still widely used. There are two important points to

note about these sets of factors

The bearing capacity equation assumes that the effects of c', , and '

can be superimposed. However, this is not correct as there is an

interaction between the three effects. This is a consequence of the

plastic nature of the soil response.

The formulae give the ultimate bearing capacity. In practice the soil

will deform significantly before general bearing failure occurs and large

settlements may occur. Local failure (yield) will occur at some depth

beneath the footing at a load less than the ultimate collapse load. The

zone of plastic (yielding) soil will then spread as the load is increased.

Only when the failure zone extends to the surface will a failure

mechanism exist.

keep settlements within acceptable bounds, and to avoid problems with

local failure.

Example

= 25 kN/m2, u = 0, c' = 2 kN/m2, ' = 25o, and sat = 15 kN/m2.

Determine the short term and long term bearing capacities if the water

table is at the soil surface and the footing is founded 2 m below the

surface. The figure below shows the actual and idealised problem to be

analysed.

B=5m

Q Q=qf B

qs

D = 2m

The position of the water table is not important, but the soil must be

saturated for an undrained analysis to be appropriate.

qs = sat D = 15 2 = 30 kPa

For u = 0 values can be more accurately read from Skemptons chart also

on p28 in Data Sheets, and this is discussed further below.

B

qf qs Nq N c Nc

2

qs = 30 kPa

uo = 2 9.8 = 19.6 kPa

qs = 10.4 kPa

= 15 - 9.8 = 5.2 kPa

B

q f q s N q N c N c

2

Q = 1669 kN/m

BEARING CAPACITY THEORIES OF TERZAGHI AND SKEMPTON

40

Nq N

30 Nc

(degrees)

20

The analysis is more straightforward for u = 0 soil. The bearing capacity

formula10reduces to

qf = N c cu + q s

0

60 50 40 30 20 10 0 20 40 60 80

N q and N c N

BEARING CAPACITY FACTORS [After Terzaghi and Peck (1948)]

Values of Nc can be obtained from the chart produced by Skempton shown

Q

below (p28 in Data Sheets). It can be seen that Nc varies with the depth to

f

width ratio D/B and with the shape of q the 1 footing. This chart is also

f = 2 B N + cN c + D f N q continuous footing

applicable to deep foundations, that is with D/B > 1.

B

q f = 0.4 BN + 1.3cN c + D f Nq square

q f = 0.6 RN + 1.3cN c + D f N q circular

It is often assumed

a that the stress

q= D D due to the weight of the footing, and any

f

f

soil used to buryb the footing, is equivalent to the soil stress q s and thus the

d

net bearingc

capacity can be written

Bearing capacity of a shallow foundation

qult = cu Nc

q ult = cN c

9

8

Nc

7 D

B

6

5.14

Nc (for rectangle)

5

0 1 2 3 4 5 = (0.84+0.16 B ) N c (square)

L

D/B

L= Length of footing

q f = cNc + D

During the excavation of well supported trenches and larger holes in the

ground it is possible for failure to occur as the soil heaves up into the base

of the excavation. This mode of failure is a kind of bearing capacity failure.

The weight of clay besides the excavation tends to push the underlying clay

into the excavation.

B

D

heave

The driving pressure causing failure = D

Bearing capacity c N

and the Factor of Safety = u c

Stress cau sin g failure D

Values for Nc can be determined from Skemptons chart given above. The

restraining effects of the soil around the excavation have been ignored. For

shallow excavations this has the effect of slightly increasing the factor of

safety.

Deep (Pile) foundations

Piles are relatively long and slender members used to transmit foundation

loads through soil strata of low bearing capacity to deeper soil or rock

having a higher bearing capacity. The method by which this occurs is the

basis of the simplest pile type classification. We have two main pile types:

1. End-bearing piles

ROCK

Strength

increases

with depth

For both pile types a further distinction is required based on their method of

installation.

formed before being driven, jacked,

screwed or hammered into the ground.

bored in the ground, and the pile is

then usually formed in the hole.

These categories may be further subdivided into

Large Displacement

- Solid - Timber/Concrete

- Hollow with a closed end - Steel or concrete tubes

void with concrete

Small displacement

Screw piles

Steel tube and H-sections - (Tube sections may plug and become

large displacement)

No displacement

construction the hole may need to be supported for which there are two

main options

- steel casing

- drilling mud

the soil surface from the overlying structure.

For the majority of foundations the loads applied to the piles are primarily

vertical. Horizontal loads arising from wind loads on structures are usually

relatively small and are ignored.

However, for piles in jetties, foundations for bridge piers, tall chimneys, and

offshore piled foundations the lateral resistance is an important

consideration.

Only the analysis of piles subjected to vertical loads is considered here. The

analysis of piles subjected to lateral and moment loading is more complex

because of the nature of the soil-structure interaction.

piles are also widely used as a means of controlling settlement and

differential settlement. In these notes only the ultimate axial capacity is

considered.

Vertically Loaded Piles

The total pile resistance may be split into components from the base and

the shaft. Consideration of static equilibrium then gives the ultimate

capacity as:

Pu

Pbu

Pu = Ultimate load capacity of the pile

Pbu = Ultimate resistance at the base of the pile (Base resistance)

Psu = Ultimate side shear resistance on the pile shaft (Shaft

resistance)

W = Self-weight of the pile

Base Resistance

resistance by

fb+po

Pbu = Ab ( fb + po)

po

If the pile does not extend above the soil surface it is found that the pile

weight is usually similar to the force due to the overburden pressure. Thus

W Ab po

and Pu = Psu + Ab fb

Side Resistance

Psu f s A s

In general the side resistance will be a function of depth below the surface,

because both the undrained strength su (short term undrained analysis)

and the effective stresses (long term analysis) increase with depth. The

average shear stress can be expressed mathematically as

L

1

L 0

fs f s dz

For these soils the limiting capacity is often controlled by the short term

(undrained) condition.

Base resistance

P bu = A b ( f b + po ) = Ab qf

where qf is the ultimate bearing capacity. For a soil with u = 0 the ultimate

bearing capacity can be written

qf = Nc su + D = Nc su + po

fb = Nc su

It is conventional to take cu = cub

where sub is the undrained shear strength of the soil at the pile base and to

assume u is zero. The value of Nc can then be obtained from Skempton's

chart (p28 Data Sheets) which is applicable for u = 0.

When using this chart it is important to check the length to diameter ratio

L/D (D/B on the chart). It is normally assumed that pile bases may be

treated as deep foundations and that Nc = 9. However, if L/D is less than 4,

Nc will be lower than 9 as shown in the chart below and the ultimate

capacity will be similarly reduced.

BEARI NG CAPACITY THEORIES OF TERZAGHI AND SKEMPTON

40

N N

B

q

30 Nc

(degrees)

20

10

0

60 50 40 30 20 10 0 20 40 60 80

Nq and N c N

D

BEARING CAPACITY FACTORS [After Terzaghi and Peck (1948)]

Qf

qf = 1 B N + cN c + D N continuous footing

2 f q

B

qf = 0.4 BN + 1.3cN c + D f Nq square

qf = 0.6 RN + 1.3cN c + D f Nq circular

q= Df Df

a

d

b

c

q ult = cN c

9

8

Nc

7 D

qf = su Nc + D

B

6

5.14 Nc (for rectangle)

5

0 1 2 3 4 5 = (0.84+0.16 B ) Nc (square)

L

D/B

L= Lengt h of footing

q f = cN c + D

Side Resistance

Both total stress and effective stress methods of analysis are used to

estimate the side resistance for saturated clays. Here we consider only the

total stress or method.

f s ( z) su ( z )

= an empirical reduction factor which depends on:

soil type

pile type

soil strength (see chart below, p105 Data Sheets)

method of installation

time since installation

estimate .

1.0

0.8

Reduction Factor,

0.6

0.4

0.2

0

0 100 200

FOR PILES IN CLAY

Example

where the site consists of a 6 m layer of soft clay with s u = 25 kPa overlying

a deep deposit of stiff clay with su= 120 kPa. The soil has sat = 18 kN/m3

and the pile is constructed from reinforced concrete with a unit weight of 22

kN/m3.

1. Side resistance

Pu

Average shear stress

L

1

L 0

fs f s dz 6 su = 25

m

1 kPa

= ( 1 s u1 z1 2 s u2 z 2 )

10

1

= ( 1 25 6 0.43 120 4 )

10

= 35.6 kPa 4

su = 120

m

kPa

Ultimate shaft resistance

Psu f s A s

= 35.6 d L

= 1.12 MN

2. Base Resistance

L/D = 10 Nc = 9

fb = 9 120 = 1080

po = 18 10 = 180

12

Pbu = (1260 ) 0.99 MN

4

Pu = Psu + Pbu - W

12 10 22

= 1.12 + 0.99 -

4 1000

= 1.94 MN

Base resistance

The net end bearing pressure fb can be expressed in terms of the effective

vertical stress at the pile base v, and a bearing capacity factor Nq

f b N q v

A wide range of values are reported for N q but the most widely used are

those derived by Berezantev et al shown below (p 107 Data Sheets). N q is

very sensitive to the friction angle, particularly for friction angles greater

than 36o. Because of the sensitivity to the most sensible value to choose

in design is the ultimate (critical state) value, cs.

300

260

220

180

Nq 140

100

60

L/d =20

20

L/d

24 28 32 36 40 44

(degrees)

(After Berezantzev et al, 1961)

Side Resistance

fs

h f s h tan

PILE SOIL

= friction angle between the soil and the pile

interface). The horizontal stress is difficult to determine and it

is normally expressed as:

h = K v

the initial stress state and the stress changes due to

installation.

assume that

= cs

K = Nq/50

Nq

fs v tan cs

50

and the average is

L

1 N q ( z)

L 0 50

fs v ( z) tan cs ( z) dz

the Australian Piling Standard

uniformly underneath a structure or in distinct pile groups under heavily

loaded areas. In design a check should be made of the ultimate capacity of

the group. This will be the lesser of:

1. The sum of the ultimate loads of the individual piles, that is n Pu1

assumed to act independently)

the soil between the piles

For example consider the four pile group shown below. Both the base and

shaft resistance now need to be considered.

PLAN

VIEW B

ELEVATION

The net base resistance, fb (= Nc sub ) is the same as for a single pile, but

the value of Nc may change as a result of the different depth to width ratio

which becomes L/A rather than L/D for a single pile.

- Buildings on the Slope Considering Effects of Uneven Settlement of many Piles on the Structure Research.pdfUploaded byRadhi Wahyuzi
- C7 Deep foundation.pdfUploaded byLeo Lai
- Design of Isolated FootingUploaded byAKVISHWA
- 2-INTRODUCTION Foundation ENGG.pdfUploaded byFarooq Hussain
- test3Uploaded byjhacademyhyd
- pile-design.xlsUploaded byNitesh Singh
- Subgroup C ReportUploaded byapi-3709579
- Chapter 5Uploaded byJaswinder Kaur
- LatPilePYUploaded bypperic13
- 3052_c000Uploaded byBasilio Splvd
- End Bearing Capcity of Pile FoundationUploaded byMehdi Ben Taieb
- FBPier manualUploaded byphanoanhgtvt
- Design of Pile FoundationUploaded byAshish Karki
- 103552Uploaded byAnbarasan Sivaraj
- Step5-Lateral Capacity.pdfUploaded byGEOMAHESH
- Bored Piling Pakubumi 2009 MechanicalUploaded byjimdabrond
- Step5-Lateral_Capacity.pdfUploaded byOliverT
- CEU313_CT2 (1)Uploaded byKrishna Prasad E
- 104806455-Design-RCC-2-Storey-Building.pptxUploaded bySureshKumar
- Bearing Capacity FactorsUploaded byDeepak Kumar Mallick
- Inspection ReportUploaded byAashish Gupta
- 3.2.14 Rectangular FootingUploaded byNeil Son
- Sasa Test ProgramUploaded bySaša Marin
- Unit-3 Bearing CapacityUploaded bySabarinath Murugan
- Bearing Capacity of SoilUploaded byAladdin Narzo
- Idp ProjectUploaded byNajibu Auwalu Namadina
- Major bridge.docxUploaded byNatarajan Saravanan
- CE_4210-6210_notes.pdfUploaded bykrivco
- Brng Cpcty f Rf nd Flr RcksUploaded byalonsooo_
- Yidao Metal- High Strength Thread Bar & AccessoryUploaded byAnna

- Excel for Civil Engineers_PreviewUploaded byabdelbagi taha
- 06 - Sight DistanceUploaded byqaiseriqbal
- 041 - Slope_stabilityUploaded byqaiseriqbal
- 04 - Earth Pressure (16 Sept 2008)Uploaded byqaiseriqbal
- Environmental Lab CatalogueUploaded byqaiseriqbal
- 01 - Shear Strength of SoilsUploaded byqaiseriqbal
- SBDsForWorksSmallProcurements (1)Uploaded byqaiseriqbal
- RetainingWall DesignUploaded byDebendra Dev Khanal
- 03 Bond Design of Gravity WallsUploaded bykarl_micallef

- Nterior PaintingUploaded byJaysonT.Bautista
- Goodbye, Hazen; Hello, Kozeny-CarmanUploaded byOscar
- GMM 3 and 2 CHAPTER 5 Guided Missile Launching SystemsUploaded bypankaj
- Decision Science PPT 1Uploaded bySoumik Nag
- Schindler 3300 Elevator Product BrochureUploaded bysugiyanto
- Concrete Vebe TestUploaded byDarrenTofu
- Service_charges of PNBUploaded byfreakyansuman
- Getting the Full Benefits of a HazopUploaded byaymenkaram
- Power CompaniesUploaded byRatri Mukherjee
- PTP600 Hazardous Location GuideUploaded byAdvantec Srl
- OTN TechnologyUploaded byAlejandro Ramos
- Asteroid Mini User Guide UkUploaded byGaurav Asati
- Marine BrochureUploaded bySilvio Roman
- Peace Centre_BoardUploaded byAnonymous FrLUTo
- History of the AirplaneUploaded byNanda Ginting
- Lg Lm u1350aUploaded byluis262
- 60 questoesUploaded byminasemmacae
- MillwardBrown POV Brand DifferentiationUploaded bydoquangminh
- UT Dallas Syllabus for ee6360.501 06f taught by Issa Panahi (imp015000)Uploaded byUT Dallas Provost's Technology Group
- Vapour Compression UnitUploaded byifoo82
- e HealthUploaded bymanaskollam
- 05 Azure ContainersUploaded byKompella Phani Kumar
- BhashaIME User Reference 712Uploaded byMadhu Chan
- Nolo Complete Books-in-Print 2010-2011Uploaded byNolo
- Aquaponics in Hawaii ConferenceUploaded byNess Lum
- SeeGull LX User Manual Rev RUploaded byIan Jasper S. Leyva
- Electrical and Instrumentation Engineering for Oil and Gas FacilitiesUploaded bySyafRizal
- Collecting, Restoring Vintage Radios (Magazine Article) - P, Stenning (2002) WWUploaded by10sd156
- ML15233A188Uploaded byNathan Block
- Lesson 1-Introduction to Algorithmic ThinkingUploaded byWycliffe Mwebi