0 Up votes0 Down votes

25 views38 pagesBearing Capacity

Nov 04, 2017

© © All Rights Reserved

PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

Bearing Capacity

© All Rights Reserved

25 views

Bearing Capacity

© All Rights Reserved

- Lesson 08-Chapter 8 Shallow Foundations.pdf
- Ce162-Terzhagi_s Bearing Capacity
- Geotechnical Investigation and Monitoring Results of a Landslide
- Foundation for Dynamic Load
- Correlation Soil Properties
- SEPLAT- Review of Obax Design
- 2720_39_1
- SOIL LAB
- Lateral Earth Pressures
- ISRM-Is-1981-003_On Shear Behaviours of Rock Containing Weak Planes
- Final Version
- A Cohesive Element Model for Mixed Mode Loading With Frictional Contact Capability 2013 International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering
- Shallow Foundation
- ARMA-06-1110_Shear Strength Model for Rock Joint and Its Applicability
- Chapters 6 and 7
- 9_Headed_Anchor_Design.pdf
- 75857_04.pdf
- Bearing Capacity Lec 03
- Abstract
- Dss Help

You are on page 1of 38

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations- Bearing Capacity

Prepared by: Engr. Marc Lin F. Abonales

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

INTRODUCTION

The lowest past of a structure is generally referred to as the foundation.

A properly designed foundation is one that transfers the load Its function is to transfer the

throughout the soil without overstressing the soil. load of the structure to the

soil on which it is resting.

Can result in either

Thus, geotechnical and structural

excessive settlement Shallow foundations are

engineers who design or shear failure of

those foundations that have a

foundations must evaluate the the soil, both of

which cause damage depth-of-embedment-to-width

bearing capacity of soils.

to the structure. ratio of approximately less

than four.

1. They have to be safe against overall shear failure in the soil that supports them.

2. They cannot undergo excessive displacement, or settlement.

1

8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

INTRODUCTION

TYPES OF

FOUNDATION

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

GENERAL CONCEPTS

Bearing capacity: The capacity of

Three modes of failure:

soil to support the loads applied

to the ground. The bearing

a) General Shear Failure

capacity of soil is the maximum

average contact pressure between Most common type of shear failure;

the foundation and the soil which occurs in strong soils and rocks

should not produce shear failure

in the soil.

b) Local Shear Failure

Ultimate bearing capacity: The Intermediate between general and

load per unit area of the punching shear failure

foundation at which shear failure

in soil occurs. The maximum

c) Punching Shear Failure

bearing capacity of soil at which

the soil fails by shear. Occurs in very loose sands weak

clays

2

8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

GENERAL CONCEPTS

Consider a strip (i.e., theoretically length is

infinity) foundation resting on the surface of a

dense sand or stiff cohesive soil, as shown in the

figure, with a width of B. If load is gradually

applied to the foundation, settlement will

increase. The variation of the load per unit area

on the foundation, q, with the foundation

settlement is also shown in the figure. At a certain

point when the load per unit area equals qu a

sudden failure in the soil supporting the

foundation will take place, and the failure surface

in the soil will extend to the ground surface. This

load per unit area, qu, is usually referred to as the

ultimate bearing capacity of the foundation. When

this type of sudden failure in soil takes place, it is

called general shear failure.

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

GENERAL CONCEPTS

If the foundation under consideration rests on sand or clayey

soil of medium compaction, an increase of load on the

foundation will also be accompanied by an increase of

settlement. However, in this case the failure surface in the

soil will gradually extend outward from the foundation, as

shown by the solid lines in the figure. When the load per unit

area on the foundation equals qu(1), the foundation movement

will be accompanied by sudden jerks. A considerable

movement of the foundation is then required for the failure

surface in soil to extend to the ground surface (as shown in

broken lines in the figure). The load per unit area at which

this happens is the ultimate bearing capacity, qu. Beyond this

point, an increase of load will be accompanied by a large

increase of foundation settlement. The load per unit area of

the foundation, qu(1), is referred to as the first failure load.

Note that a peak value of q is not realized in this type of

failure, which is called local shear failure in soil.

3

8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

GENERAL CONCEPTS

If the foundation is supported by a

fairly loose soil, the load-settlement

plot will be like the one in the figure.

In this case, the failure surface in soil

will not extend to the ground surface.

Beyond the ultimate failure load, qu,

the load-settlement plot will be steep

and practically linear. This type of

failure in soil is called punching shear

failure.

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

GENERAL CONCEPTS

General shear failure results in a Local shear failure results in Punching shear failure occurs

clearly defined plastic yield slip considerable vertical in very loose sands and soft

surface beneath the footing and displacement prior to the clays and there is little or no

spreads out one or both sides, development of noticeable development of planes of

eventually to the ground surface. shear planes. These shear shear failure in the underlying

Failure is sudden and will often planes do not generally extend soil. Slip surfaces are

be accompanied by severe tilting. to the soil surface, but some generally restricted to vertical

Generally associated with adjacent bulging may be planes adjacent to the footing,

heaving. This type of failure observed, but little tilting of the and the soil may be dragged

occurs in dense sand or stiff clay. structure results. This shear down at the surface in this

failure occurs for loose sand region.

and soft clay.

4

8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

GENERAL CONCEPTS

From the curves the different types of shear

failures can be predicted :

For general shear failure there is a

pronounced peak after which load

decreases with increase in settlement. The

load at the peak gives the ultimate stress

or load.

For local shear failure there is no

pronounced peak like general shear failure

and hence the ultimate load is calculated

for a particular settlement.

Load settlement curves for different For punching shear failure the load goes

shear on increasing with increasing settlement

and hence there is no peak resistance.

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

GENERAL CONCEPTS

5

8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

TERZAGHIS ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY THEORY

Terzaghi (1943) was the first to present a comprehensive theory for evaluating of rough shallow

foundations. According to this theory, a foundation is shallow if the depth, Df, of the foundation is less

than or equal to the width of the foundation. Later investigators, however, have suggested that

foundations with Df equal to 3 to 4 times the width of the foundation may be defined as shallow

foundation.

Terzaghi suggested that for a

continuous, or strip foundation (that is, the

width-to-length ratio of the foundation

approaches 0), the failure surface in soil at

ultimate load may be assumed to be similar to

that shown below (This is the case of general

shear failure). The effect of soil above the

bottom of the foundation may also be assumed

to be replaced by an equivalent surcharge, q =

Df (where: = unit weight of the soil).

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

TERZAGHIS ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY THEORY

Assumptions for Terzaghi's Method:

Depth of foundation is less than or equal to its width

No sliding occurs between foundation and soil (rough foundation)

Soil beneath foundation is homogeneous semi infinite mass

Mohr-Coulomb model for soil

General shear failure mode is the governing mode (but not the only mode)

No soil consolidation occurs

Foundation is very rigid relative to the soil

Soil above bottom of foundation has no shear strength; is only a surcharge

load against the overturning load

Applied load is compressive and applied vertically to the centroid of the

foundation

No applied moments present

6

8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

TERZAGHIS ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY THEORY

The failure zone under the foundation

can be separated into three parts:

1. The triangular zone ACD immediately

under the foundation. (Active zone)

2. The radial shear zones ADF and CDE,

with the curves DE and DF being arcs of a

logarithmic spiral. (Transition zone)

3. Two triangular Rankine passive zones

AFH and CEG. (Passive zone)

The angles CAD and ACD are assumed

to be equal to the soil friction angle (that is, =

). Note that, with the replacement of the soil

above the bottom of the foundation by an

equivalent surcharge q, the shear resistance of

the soil along the failure surfaces GI and HJ was

neglected.

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

TERZAGHIS ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY THEORY

Using the equilibrium analysis, Terzaghi expressed the ultimate bearing capacity in

the form (For foundations that exhibit the general shear failure mode in soils)

= + + (for continuous or strip foundation)

= . + + . (for square foundation)

= . + + . (for circular foundation)

Where:

B = width for square footing

= diameter for circular footing

c' = cohesion of soil

= unit weight of soil

q = Df

Nc, Nq, N = bearing capacity factors that are nondimensional and are only functions of the soil friction angle,

7

8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

TERZAGHIS ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY THEORY

= + +

= + +

Cohesion Below

term Above foundation

foundation level

level

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

TERZAGHIS ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY THEORY

The bearing capacity factors Nc, Nq, and N are

defined by:

8

8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

TERZAGHIS ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY THEORY

For foundations that exhibit the local shear failure mode in soils, Terzaghi suggested the

following modifications:

=

= + + (for continuous or strip foundation)

= . + + . (for square foundation)

= . + + . (for circular foundation)

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

TERZAGHIS ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY THEORY

capacity factors, can be calculated by

using the bearing capacity factor

equations (for Nc, Nq, and N, respectively)

by replacing

9

8/22/2017

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

TERZAGHIS ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY THEORY

into account the effects of the foundation shape (B/L), depth of embedment

(Df) and the load inclination. Many design engineers, however, still use

Terzaghis equation, which provides fairly good results considering the

uncertainty of the soil conditions at various sites.

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

FACTOR OF SAFETY

The net ultimate bearing capacity is defined as the

Calculating the gross allowable load-

ultimate pressure per unit area of the foundation that

bearing capacity of shallow foundations requires can be supported by the soil in excess of the pressure

the application of a factor of safety (FS) to the gross caused by the surrounding soil at the foundation level.

ultimate bearing capacity, or If the difference between the unit weight of concrete

surrounding is assumed to be negligible, then

=

However, some practicing engineers prefer

to use a factor of safety such that

equation should be at least 3 in all cases.

10

8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

EXAMPLE

PROBLEM 1.

PROBLEM 2.

Based from Problem 1, assume that local shear failure occurs in

the soil.

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

The ultimate bearing capacity equations based from Terzaghis equations are for continuous,

square, and circular foundations only; they do not address the case of rectangular foundations (0 < B/L

< 1). Also, The equations do no take into account the shearing resistance along the failure surface in

soil above the bottom of the foundation. In addition, the load on the foundation may be inclined. To

account for all these shortcomings, Meyerhof (1963) suggested the following form of the general

bearing capacity equation:

Where:

c = cohesion

q = effective stress at the level of the bottom of the foundation

= unit weight of soil

B = width of foundation ( = diameter for a circular foundation)

Fcs, Fqs, Fs = shape factors

Fcd, Fqd, Fd = depth factors

Fci, Fqi, Fi = load inclination factors

Nc, Nq, N = bearing capacity factors

11

8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

Bearing Capacity Factors

The equation for Nc was originally derived by

Based on laboratory and field studies of bearing Prandtl (1921), and the relation for Nq was

capacity, the basic nature of the failure surface presented by Reissner (1924). Caquot and Kerisel

in soil suggested by Terzaghi now appears to be (1953) and Vesic (1973) gave the relation for N as

correct (Vesic, 1973). However, the angle

shown in is closer to 45 + /2 than to , as was

originally assumed by Terzaghi. With = 45 +

/2, the relations for Nc and Nq can be derived

as

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

Bearing Capacity Factors

The table shows the variation of the

preceding bearing capacity factors with

soil friction angles.

12

8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

Shape, Depth, Inclination Factors

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

Shape, Depth, Inclination Factors

13

8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

Shape, Depth, Inclination Factors

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

EXAMPLE

PROBLEM 3.

Solve problem 1 using the general bearing capacity equation.

PROBLEM 4.

The applied load on a shallow square foundation makes an angle

of 15 with the vertical. Given: B = 6 ft, Df = 3 ft, = 115 lb/ft3, =

25, and c = 500 lb/ft2. Use FS = 4 and determine the gross

allowable load using the general bearing capacity equation.

14

8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

MODIFICATION OF BEARING CAPACITY EQUATIONS FOR

WATER TABLE

The preceding equations

give the ultimate bearing

capacity, based on the

assumptions that the water table

is located well below the

foundation. However, if the water

table is close to the foundation,

some modifications of the

bearing capacity equations will

be necessary.

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

MODIFICATION OF BEARING CAPACITY EQUATIONS FOR

WATER TABLE

The preceding equations

give the ultimate bearing

capacity, based on the

assumptions that the water table

is located well below the

foundation. However, if the water

table is close to the foundation,

some modifications of the

bearing capacity equations will

be necessary.

15

8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

EXAMPLE

PROBLEM 5. A column foundation is 3 m x 3 m in plan. Given: Df = 2 m, =

25, c = 70 kPa. If FS = 3, determine the net allowable load the foundation

could carry.

a. Using Terzaghis Bearing Capacity Equation

b. Using General Bearing Capacity Equation

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

EXAMPLE

PROBLEM 6.

16

8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

Some Terzaghis bearing capacity equations which apply to the case of

general shear failure were modified to Terzaghis bearing capacity equations

in case of local shear failure to take into account the change of failure mode

in soil. The change of failure mode is due to soil compressibility, to account

for which Vesic (1973) proposed the following modifications of the General

Bearing Capacity Equation that was proposed by Meyerhof:

Where: Fcc, Fqc, and Fc are soil compressibility factors.

The soil compressibility factors were derived by Vesic (1973) by

analogy to the expansion of cavities.

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

According to that theory, in order to calculate Fcc, Fqc, and Fc, the following steps should be taken:

Step 1. Calculate the rigidity index, Ir, of the soil at a depth approximately B/2 below the bottom of the foundation, or

=

+

Where:

Gs = shear modulus of the soil =

(+ )

Es = Modulus of Elasticity

s = Poissons ratio

q = effective overburden pressure at a depth of Df + B/2

() = . .

The variations of Ir(cr) with B/L are given in the next table.

17

8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

According to that theory, in order to calculate Fcc, Fqc, and Fc, the following steps should be

taken:

Step 3. If Ir Ir(cr), then

However, if Ir < Ir(cr), then

(. )( )

= = . + . +

+

For = 0,

= . + . + .

For > 0,

=

Note: The bearing capacity factors to be used is the same table used in the general bearing capacity

equations.

18

8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

EXAMPLE

PROBLEM 7. For a shallow foundation, B = 0.6 m, L = 1.2 m, and Df

= 0.6 m. the known soil characteristics are as follows:

Soil:

= 25

c = 48 kPa

= 18 kN/m3

Modulus of Elasticity, Es = 620 kPa

Poissons Ratio, s = 0.3

19

8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

In several instances, as with the base of a In such cases, the distribution of pressure

retaining wall, foundations are subjected to moments in by the foundation on the soil is not uniform. The

addition to the vertical load, as shown in the figure. nominal distribution of pressure is

estimate.

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

system equivalent to that shown in

the figure (a).

20

8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

Case 2: e = B/6

The distance, e = M/Q, is the eccentricity. The

nominal distribution of pressure is

Case 1: e < B/6

qmin = 0

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

The figure below shows the nature of failure surface in soil for a surface strip foundation subjected to an

eccentric load. The factor of safety for such type of loading against bearing capacity failure can be evaluated as

=

Where: Qult = ultimate load-carrying capacity

21

8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY UNDER

ECCENTRIC LOADING ONE-WAY ECCENTRICITY

A. Effective Area Method (Meyerhof, 1953) Step 2. Use the general bearing capacity

equation for the ultimate bearing capacity:

In 1953, Meyerhof proposed a theory that is generally referred to

as the effective area method. q'u = cNcFcsFcdFci + qNqFqsFqdFqi + BNFsFdFi

The following is a step-by-step procedure for

determining the ultimate load that the soil can support and the To evaluate Fcs, Fqs, and Fs, use the effective

factor of safety against bearing capacity failure: length and effective width dimensions instead

of L and B, respectively. To determine

Step 1. Determine the effective dimensions of Fcd,Fqd,and Fd, do not replace B with B.

the foundation: Step 3. The total ultimate load that the

B = effective width = B 2e foundation can sustain is

L = effective length = L Qult = qu(B)(L) = qu(A)

Note that if the eccentricity were in the Where: A = effective area

direction of the length of the foundation, the

value of L would be equal to L 2e. The value Step 4. The factor of safety against bearing

of B would equal B. The smaller of the two capacity failure is

dimensions (i.e., L and B) is the effective =

width of the foundation.

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY UNDER

ECCENTRIC LOADING ONE-WAY ECCENTRICITY

B. Prakash and Saran Theory

Prakash and Saran (1971) also recommended the

Prakash and Saran (1971) analyzed the problem of following for the shape factors:

ultimate bearing capacity of eccentrically and vertically

loaded continuous (strip) foundations by using the one-

sided failure surface in soil. According to this theory, the

Fcs(e) = 1.2 0.025 (with a minimum of 1.0)

ultimate load per unit length of a continuous foundation can Fqs(e) = 1

be estimated as

Fs(e) = . + . + .

Qult = B[cNc(e) + qNq(e) + BN(e)]

eccentric loading.

For rectangular foundations, the ultimate load can

be given as

22

8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY UNDER

ECCENTRIC LOADING ONE-WAY ECCENTRICITY

The variations of Nc(e), Nq(e) and N(e) with soil friction angle are given in the following figures:

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY UNDER

ECCENTRIC LOADING ONE-WAY ECCENTRICITY

C. Reduction Factor Method (For Granular Soil) The magnitude of Rk can be expressed as

=

Purkayastha and Char (1977) carried out

stability analysis of eccentrically loaded continuous

foundations (Fqs = 1, Fs = 1) supported by a layer of Where a and k are functions of the embedment ratio Df/B.

sand using the method of slices. Based on that analysis, Hence,

they proposed

() qu(eccentric) = qu(centric) (1 Rk) = qu(centric)

=

() Where

Where: qu(centric) = qNqFqd + BNFd

Rk = reduction factor

qu(eccentric) = ultimate bearing capacity of eccentrically The relationships for Fqd and Fd are the same used in

loaded continuous foundations general bearing capacity equations.

qu(centric) = ultimate bearing capacity of centrally loaded The ultimate load per unit length of the

continuous foundation foundation can then be given as

Qu = Bqu(eccentric)

23

8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY UNDER

ECCENTRIC LOADING ONE-WAY ECCENTRICITY

C. Reduction Factor Method (For Granular Soil)

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

EXAMPLE

PROBLEM 8. A continuous foundation is shown in the figure

below. If the load eccentricity is 0.2 m, determine the ultimate load,

Qult, per unit length of the foundation. Use:

a. Meyerhofs effective area method

b. Prakash and Saran Theory

c. Reduction Factor Method

24

8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY UNDER

ECCENTRIC LOADING TWO-WAY ECCENTRICITY

Consider a situation in which a foundation is subjected to a vertical ultimate load Qult and a

moment M, as shown in figures (a) and (b). For this case, the components of the moment M

about the x- and y-axes can be determined as Mx and My, respectively, as shown figure (c).

This condition is equivalent to a load Qult placed eccentrically on the foundation with x = eB

and y = eL, as shown in figure (d).

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY UNDER

ECCENTRIC LOADING TWO-WAY ECCENTRICITY

Therefore,

= =

Qult = quA

Where:

qu = cNcFcsFcdFci + qNqFqsFqdFqi + BNFsFdFi

A = effective area = BL

As before, to evaluate Fcs, Fqs, and Fs (the same formulas used in the general bearing

capacity equation), use the effective length L and effective width B instead of L and B,

respectively. To calculate Fcd, Fqd, and Fd (the same formulas used in the general bearing

capacity equation), do not replace B with B.

25

8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY UNDER

ECCENTRIC LOADING TWO-WAY ECCENTRICITY

In determining the effective area, A, effective width, B, and effective length, L, five possible

cases may arise (Higher and Anders, 1985).

Case I. eL/L 1/6 and eB/B 1/6. The effective area for this

condition is shown in the figure, or

A = B1L1

Where:

= .

= .

The effective length L is the larger of the two

dimensions B1 and L1. So the effective width is

=

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY UNDER

ECCENTRIC LOADING TWO-WAY ECCENTRICITY

In determining the effective area, A, effective width, B, and effective length, L, five possible

cases may arise (Higher and Anders, 1985).

Case II. eL/L < 0.5 and 0 < eB/B < 1/6. The effective area for

this case, shown in the figure, is

A = (L1 + L2)B

next slide. The effective width is

=

( )

The effective length is

L = L1 or L2 (whichever is larger)

26

8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY UNDER

ECCENTRIC LOADING TWO-WAY ECCENTRICITY

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

27

8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY UNDER

ECCENTRIC LOADING TWO-WAY ECCENTRICITY

In determining the effective area, A, effective width, B, and effective length, L, five possible

cases may arise (Higher and Anders, 1985).

Case III. eL/L < 1/6 and 0 < eB/B < 0.5. The effective area for

this case, shown in the figure, is

A = (B1 + B2)L

B = A/L

The effective length is

L = L

from the next slide.

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY UNDER

ECCENTRIC LOADING TWO-WAY ECCENTRICITY

28

8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY UNDER

ECCENTRIC LOADING TWO-WAY ECCENTRICITY

In determining the effective area, A, effective width, B, and effective length, L, five possible

cases may arise (Higher and Anders, 1985).

Case IV. eL/L < 1/6 and eB/B < 1/6. The effective area for this

case, shown in the figure, is

The ratio B2/B, and thus B2, can be determined by using the

eL/L curves that slope upward. Similarly, the ratio L2/L, and

thus L2, can be determined by using the eL/L curves that

slope downward. (Refer to the figure found in the next

slide.)

The effective width is

B = A/L

The effective length is

L = L

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY UNDER

ECCENTRIC LOADING TWO-WAY ECCENTRICITY

29

8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY UNDER

ECCENTRIC LOADING TWO-WAY ECCENTRICITY

In determining the effective area, A, effective width, B, and effective length, L, five possible

cases may arise (Higher and Anders, 1985).

loading, the eccentricity is always one-way. The effective

area, A, and the effective width, B, for a circular

foundation are given in a nondimensional form in the table

found in the next slide. Once A and B are determined, the

effective length can be obtained as

30

8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

For Case V.

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

EXAMPLE

PROBLEM 9. A square

foundation is shown in the figure

with eL = 0.3 m and eB = 0.15 m.

Assume two-way eccentricity,

and determine the ultimate load,

Qult.

31

8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

EXAMPLE

PROBLEM 10. Consider the foundation in problem 9 with the

following changes:

eL = 0.18 m

eB = 0.12 m

= 25

c = 25 kPa

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

BEARING CAPACITY OF A CONTINUOUS FOUNDATION

SUBJECTED TO ECCENTRIC INCLINED LOADING

The problem of ultimate bearing capacity of a continuous foundation subjected to an

eccentric inclined load was studied by Saran and Agarwal (1991). If a continuous foundation

is located at a depth Df below the ground surface and is subjected to an eccentric load (load

eccentricity = e) inclined at an angle to the vertical, the ultimate capacity can be expressed

as

= + +

Where: Nc(ei), Nq(ei), and N(ei) = bearing capacity factors.

The variations of the bearing capacity factors with e/B, , and derived by Saran and

Agarwal are given in figures in the next slides.

32

8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

BEARING CAPACITY OF A CONTINUOUS FOUNDATION

SUBJECTED TO ECCENTRIC INCLINED LOADING

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

BEARING CAPACITY OF A CONTINUOUS FOUNDATION

SUBJECTED TO ECCENTRIC INCLINED LOADING

33

8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

BEARING CAPACITY OF A CONTINUOUS FOUNDATION

SUBJECTED TO ECCENTRIC INCLINED LOADING

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

EXAMPLE

PROBLEM 11. A continuous foundation is shown in the figure.

Estimate the ultimate load, Qult, per unit length of the foundation.

34

8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

MAT FOUNDATIONS COMMON TYPES

Mat foundations are shallow foundations which

is sometimes referred to as a raft foundation. It is a

combined footing that may cover the entire area under a

structure supporting several columns and walls.

Mat foundations are sometimes preferred for

soils that have low-bearing capacities but that will have to

support high column and/or wall loads. Under some

conditions, spread footings would have to cover more than

half the building area, and mat foundations might be more

economical. Several types of mat foundations are currently

used. Some of the common types are shown schematically

in the figures and include the following:

1. Flat plate (Figure a). The mat is of uniform thickness.

2. Flat plate thickened under columns. (Figure b)

3. Beams and slab (Figure c). The beams run both ways,

and the columns are located at the intersection of the

beams.

4. Flat plates with pedestals (Figure d).

5. Slab with basement walls as a part of the mat (Figure

e). The walls act as stiffeners for the mat.

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

MAT FOUNDATIONS COMMON TYPES

Mats may be

supported by piles. The piles

help in reducing the

settlement of a structure

built over highly

compressible soil. Where the

water table is high, mats are

often placed over piles to

control buoyancy.

The figure shows the

difference between the depth

Df and the width B of isolated

foundations and mat

foundation. The next figure

shows a mat foundation

under construction.

35

8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

BEARING CAPACITY OF MAT FOUNDATIONS

The gross ultimate bearing capacity A suitable factor of safety should be used to

of a mat foundation can be determined by the calculate the net allowable bearing capacity:

same equation used for spread footings, or For mats on clay, the factor of safety should not be

less than 3 under dead load and maximum live

qu = cNcFcsFcdFci + qNqFqsFqdFqi + BNFsFdFi

load. However, under the most extreme conditions,

the factor of safety should be at least 1.75 to 2.

The proper values of the bearing For mats constructed over sand, a factor of safety

capacity factors and the shape, depth, and of 3 should normally used.

load inclination factors are the same used in Under most working conditions, the factor of

the general bearing capacity equation. The safety against bearing capacity failure of mats on

term B in the equation is the smallest sand is very large.

dimension of the mat.

qnet(u) = qu q

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

EXAMPLE

PROBLEM 12. Determine the net ultimate

bearing capacity of a mat foundation

measuring 12 m x 8 m on a saturated clay

with cu = 80 kPa, = 0, and Df = 2 m.

36

8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

COMPENSATED FOUNDATIONS

The settlement of a mat foundation can be reduced by

decreasing the net pressure increase on soil and by

increasing the depth of embedment, Df. This increase is

particularly important for mats on soft clays, where large

consolidation settlements are expected. In this design, the

deeper basement is made below the higher portion of the

superstructure, so that the net pressure increase in soil at any

depth is relatively uniform. From the figure shown, the net

average applied pressure on soil can be given as

Where:

Q = dead load of the structure and live load

A = area of the mat

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

COMPENSATED FOUNDATIONS

For no increase of the net soil pressure on soil below a mat foundation, q

should be zero. Thus,

=

This relation for Df is usually referred to as the depth of embedment of a

fully compensated foundation. (The fully compensated mat foundation is one in

which the net increase in soil pressure below the mat is zero.)

compensated foundation (that is, Df < Q/A) may be given as

() ()

= =

37

8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

EXAMPLE

PROBLEM 13. The mat has dimensions of

40 m x 20 m, and the live load and dead

load on the mat are 200 MN. the mat is

placed over a layer of soft clay that has a

unit weight of 17.5 kN/m3. Find the Df for a

fully compensated foundations.

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

EXAMPLE

PROBLEM 14. Refer to Problem 13. For

the clay, cu = 60 kN/m3. If the required

factor of safety against bearing capacity

failure is 3, determine the depth of the

foundation.

38

- Lesson 08-Chapter 8 Shallow Foundations.pdfUploaded byAUNG
- Ce162-Terzhagi_s Bearing CapacityUploaded byGuianne Carlo Bustamante
- Geotechnical Investigation and Monitoring Results of a LandslideUploaded byBandilung Tz
- Foundation for Dynamic LoadUploaded byTal Fadzly
- Correlation Soil PropertiesUploaded byNabila Amatullah
- SEPLAT- Review of Obax DesignUploaded byKolade Mubarak Arisekola
- 2720_39_1Uploaded bydaimahesh
- SOIL LABUploaded bymagdyamdb
- Lateral Earth PressuresUploaded byrazvanfcs
- ISRM-Is-1981-003_On Shear Behaviours of Rock Containing Weak PlanesUploaded byamy75
- Final VersionUploaded byJessa Guzman
- A Cohesive Element Model for Mixed Mode Loading With Frictional Contact Capability 2013 International Journal for Numerical Methods in EngineeringUploaded byluiguisdj
- Shallow FoundationUploaded byAastha Soni
- ARMA-06-1110_Shear Strength Model for Rock Joint and Its ApplicabilityUploaded bycastille1956
- Chapters 6 and 7Uploaded byEstuardo Rosas Burelo
- 9_Headed_Anchor_Design.pdfUploaded bySissi Del Puppo
- 75857_04.pdfUploaded bykhamis
- Bearing Capacity Lec 03Uploaded byusman javed
- AbstractUploaded byWarren Sambile Madayag
- Dss HelpUploaded byRenova Hn
- Lesson 1 Shallow Foundation-Bearing Capacity 1.pdfUploaded byRicky Avianto
- geotechnical characteristicsUploaded byalistugui
- Shear Strength TheoryUploaded byChikkanna T
- Masonry Wall Footing DesignUploaded byAnonymous 0JQGC2
- Duncan-Chang - Parameters for Hyperbolic StressUploaded byOscar Eduardo
- Stark 2013Uploaded byMohamad Z
- 20-Slide Isotropic ModelsUploaded byKTMO
- Effects of Disturbance on Undrained StrengthsUploaded byDamien R Sering
- Profiling OCR by in-SituUploaded byLawson Chung Jenn Haur
- Memoria ZapatasUploaded bydennisIsaac2015

- Seismic Code RequirementsUploaded byronison78
- D2435-onedimconsolidUploaded byHilana Oliveira
- Sample-Curricula-Bachelor-of-Science-in-Civil-Engineering.pdfUploaded byRommel Dave Tejano
- Principles and Practices of Seismic Microzonation- Case Studies iUploaded byMarc Mathieu
- Technical_Standards_and_Guidelines_for_Planning_and_Design.pdfUploaded byPedro Marfito Jr.
- 0418b675ee1e87db00bdb662e805fa93-CSA-Lab-Manual-IV-YEAR-2015-2016--1-Uploaded byMarc Mathieu
- 103_20160404025022Uploaded byMarc Mathieu
- Highway SpiralsUploaded byChandrasiri de Silva
- Final Version Planning 2Uploaded byMogie Talampas
- Pavement Design DpwhUploaded bySwerthson Wasawas
- Appendix D - Alignment and SuperelevationUploaded byMarc Mathieu
- Superelevation of CurveUploaded byMarc Mathieu
- Soil Mechanics PlatesUploaded byMarc Mathieu
- ASTEC_Brochure.pdfUploaded byMarc Mathieu
- FGGBKLT-EfdgfdUploaded byGelo Plamenco
- 0-4365-P2Uploaded byMarc Mathieu
- Project Notes 1011Uploaded bygendadeyu552625
- Kinematics of Particles 3 1Uploaded byMarc Mathieu
- Kinematics of Particles 3Uploaded byMarc Mathieu
- Hydropower ReportUploaded byVictor Ciprian
- Kinematics of ParticlesUploaded byMarc Mathieu
- Class ListUploaded byMarc Mathieu
- Pre Stressed Concrete Solved ProblemsUploaded byJefferson T. Ignacio
- Soils OverviewUploaded byBeth Alcontin
- An introduction to soils_ soil formation and terminologyUploaded byTushar Dave

- UT Dallas Syllabus for phys2325.002.11s taught by Mustapha Ishak-Boushaki (mxi054000)Uploaded byUT Dallas Provost's Technology Group
- AD286 Preloaded BoltsUploaded bygautham21brick
- Pressure Drop Calculation Equations for PIPING and PIPELINEUploaded byMubariz841
- A Sketch for a Quantum Theory of Gravity - Rest Mass Induced by Graviton MotionUploaded byahsbon
- (Graduate Texts in Physics) Peter Hertel-Quantum Theory and Statistical Thermodynamics_ Principles and Worked Examples-Hertel, Peter, Springer Verlag (2017)Uploaded byAlex Samuel Silva
- Int_2011_YSHan_JEngMaterTech.pdfUploaded bynurettin
- 1E06-01 Structural TimberUploaded bySuman Saha
- Design of PilecapsUploaded byWahid Omar
- ConcreteUploaded bydsmnnang
- damUploaded bysharvan10
- An Introduction to Mining SeismologyUploaded byYong Praz
- Lateral Undrained Resistance of Suction Caisson AnchorsUploaded bymaker91
- BTP Sem2 FinalUploaded bySoumyajit Roy
- Modelling the Mechanical Behaviour of Expansive ClaysUploaded byAna Maria
- International Journal of Damage Mechanics-1992-Chaboche-148-71.pdfUploaded byrokhgireh_hojjat
- crossword puzzleUploaded byKimeu Lingayo Bagyon
- Mathcad - Example 8.3.1 Nd p 140 Edtd Sg 6 UsUploaded byhendragt
- 1617 Level M Applied Math GridUploaded byMikhael
- Mathematics in the Modern World (VIGNETTE).docxUploaded byJaya Porsche Ignacio Alegarbes
- Room and Auditorium AcousticsUploaded bygorvjndl
- Foundation DesignUploaded byPrem Kumar R
- Lecture19 12 Amperes LawUploaded byAli Kılıçkaya
- Crane HookUploaded byEr Prabhakar
- Retaining Wall Analysis & Design (ACI318Uploaded byAziz ul Hakeem
- MIT Electrostatics PotentialUploaded byFelipe Niño
- Archimedes Principle Q & AUploaded bysimonckt
- New Microsoft Office PowerPoint Presentation (2)Uploaded byAnson Dsouza
- PERFORMANCE OF CONCRETE MASONRY SHEAR WALLS WITH INTEGRAL CONFINED CONCRETE BOUNDARY ELEMENTSUploaded byDeep Eyes
- 965-979_Article_19[1]Uploaded byMariano Serrano
- Design of Rectangular Openings in Precast Walls Under Vertical LoadsUploaded byHaris Softić

## Much more than documents.

Discover everything Scribd has to offer, including books and audiobooks from major publishers.

Cancel anytime.