NPTEL – ADVANCED FOUNDATION ENGINEERING-I

Module 3
Lecture 10
SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS: ULTIMATE BEARING
CAPACITY

Topics
1.1 THE GENERAL BEARING CAPACITY EQUATION

 Bearing Capacity Factors

 General Comments

1.2 EFFECT OF SOIL COMPRESSIBILITY

1.3 ECCENTRICALLY LOADED FOUNDATIONS

 1.3.1 Foundation with Two-Way Eccentricity

NPTEL – ADVANCED FOUNDATION ENGINEERING-I

THE GENERAL BEARING CAPACITY EQUATION

The ultimate bearing capacity equations presented in equations (3, 7 and 8) are for
continuous, square, and circular foundations only. The do not address the case of
rectangular foundations (0 < 𝐵𝐵/𝐿𝐿 < 1. Also, the equations do not take into account the
shearing resistnace along the failure surface in soil above the bottom of the foundation
(the portion of the failure surface marked as GI and HJ in figure 3.5). 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:

𝑞𝑞𝑢𝑢 = 𝑐𝑐𝑁𝑁𝑐𝑐 𝐹𝐹𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝐹𝐹𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝐹𝐹𝑒𝑒𝑒𝑒 + 𝑞𝑞𝑁𝑁𝑞𝑞 𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 + 12𝛾𝛾𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝛾𝛾 𝐹𝐹𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 𝐹𝐹𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 𝐹𝐹𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 [3.25]

Where

𝑐𝑐 = cohesion

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

𝛾𝛾 = unit weight of soil

𝐵𝐵 = width of foundation (−diameter for a circular foundation)

𝐹𝐹𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 , 𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 , 𝐹𝐹𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 = shape factors

𝐹𝐹𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 , 𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 , 𝐹𝐹𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 = depth factors

𝐹𝐹𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 , 𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 , 𝐹𝐹𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 = load inclination factors

𝑁𝑁𝑐𝑐 , 𝑁𝑁𝑞𝑞 , 𝑁𝑁𝛾𝛾 = bearing capacity factors

The equations for determining the various factors given in equation (25) are described
briefly in the following sections. Note that the original equation for ultimate bearing
capacity is derived only for the plane-strain case (that is, for continuous foundations).
The shape, depth, and load inclination factors are empirical factors based on experimental
data.

Bearing Capacity Factors

Based on laboratory and field studies of bearing capacity, the basic nature of the failure
surface in soil suggested by Terzaghi now appears to be correct (Vesic, 1973). However,
the angle 𝛼𝛼 as shown in figure 3.5 is closer to 45 + ∅/2 than to ∅. If this change is
accepted, the values of 𝑁𝑁𝑐𝑐 , 𝑁𝑁𝑞𝑞 , and 𝑁𝑁𝛾𝛾 for a given soil friction angle will also change
from those given in table 1. With ∅ = 45 + ∅/2, the relations for 𝑁𝑁𝑐𝑐 and 𝑁𝑁𝑞𝑞 can be
derived as
NPTEL – ADVANCED FOUNDATION ENGINEERING-I

∅
𝑁𝑁𝑞𝑞 = 𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡2 �45 + 2 � 𝑒𝑒 𝜋𝜋 tan ∅ [3.26]

𝑁𝑁𝑐𝑐 = �𝑁𝑁𝑞𝑞 − 1� cot ∅ [3.27]

The equation for 𝑁𝑁𝑐𝑐 given by equation (27) was originally derived by Prandtl (1921), and
the relation for 𝑁𝑁𝑞𝑞 [equation (26)] was presented by Reissner (1924). Caquot and Kerisel
(1953) and Vesic (1973) gave the relation for 𝑁𝑁𝛾𝛾 as

𝑁𝑁𝛾𝛾 = 2�𝑁𝑁𝑞𝑞 + 1� tan ∅ [3.28]

Table 4 shows the variation of the preceding bearing capacity factors with soil friction
angles.

In many texts and reference books, the relationship for 𝑁𝑁𝛾𝛾 may be different from that in
equation (28). The reason is that there is still some controversy about the variation of 𝑁𝑁𝛾𝛾
with the soil friction angle, 𝜙𝜙. In this text, equation (28) is used.

Other relationships for 𝑁𝑁𝛾𝛾 generally cited are those given by Meyerhof (1963), Hansen
(1970), and Lundgren and Mortensen (1953). They 𝑁𝑁𝛾𝛾 values for various soil friction
angles are given in appendix B (table B-1, B-2, B-3).

Table 4 Bearing Capacity Factors

𝜙𝜙 𝑁𝑁𝑐𝑐 𝑁𝑁𝑞𝑞 𝑁𝑁𝛾𝛾 𝑁𝑁𝑞𝑞 tan 𝜙𝜙 𝜙𝜙 𝑁𝑁𝑐𝑐 𝑁𝑁𝑞𝑞 𝑁𝑁𝛾𝛾 𝑁𝑁𝑞𝑞 tan 𝜙𝜙
/𝑁𝑁𝑐𝑐 /𝑁𝑁𝑐𝑐
0 5.14 1.00 0.00 0.20 0.00 26 22.25 11.85 12.54 0.53 0.49
1 5.38 1.09 0.07 0.20 0.02 27 23.94 13.20 14.47 0.55 0.51
2 5.63 1.20 0.15 0.21 0.03 28 25.80 14.72 16.72 0.57 0.53
3 5.90 1.31 0.24 0.22 0.05 29 27.86 16.44 19.34 0.59 0.55
4 6.19 1.43 0.34 0.23 0.07 30 30.14 18.40 22.40 0.61 0.58
5 6.49 1.57 0.45 0.24 0.09 31 32.67 20.63 25.99 0.63 0.60
6 6.81 1.72 0.57 0.25 0.11 32 35.49 23.18 30.22 0.65 0.62
7 7.16 1.88 0.71 0.26 0.12 33 38.64 26.09 35.19 0.68 0.65
8 7.53 2.06 0.86 0.27 0.14 34 42.16 29.44 41.06 0.70 0.67
9 7.92 2.25 1.03 0.28 0.16 35 46.12 33.30 48.03 0.72 0.70
10 8.35 2.47 1.22 0.30 0.18 36 50.59 37.75 56.31 0.75 0.73
11 8.80 2.71 1.44 0.31 0.19 37 55.63 42.92 66.19 0.77 0.75
12 9.28 2.97 1.69 0.32 0.21 38 61.35 48.93 78.03 0.80 0.78
13 9.81 3.26 1.97 0.33 0.23 39 67.87 55.96 92.25 0.82 0.81
14 10.37 3.59 2.29 0.35 0.25 40 75.31 64.20 109.41 0.85 0.84
15 10.98 3.94 2.65 0.36 0.27 41 83.86 73.90 130.22 0.88 0.87
16 11.63 4.34 3.06 0.37 0.29 42 93.71 85.38 155.55 0.91 0.90
17 12.34 4.77 3.53 0.39 0.31 43 105.11 99.02 186.54 0.94 0.93
18 13.10 5.26 4.07 0.40 0.32 44 118.37 115.31 224.64 0.97 0.97
NPTEL – ADVANCED FOUNDATION ENGINEERING-I

19 13.93 5.80 4.68 0.42 0.34 45 133.88 134.88 271.76 1.01 1.00
20 14.83 6.40 5.39 0.43 0.36 46 152.10 158.51 330.35 1.04 1.04
21 15.82 7.07 6.20 0.45 0.38 47 173.64 187.21 403.67 1.08 1.07
22 16.88 7.82 7.13 0.46 0.40 48 199.26 222.31 496.01 1.12 1.11
23 18.05 8.66 8.20 0.48 0.42 49 229.93 265.51 613.16 1.15 1.15
24 19.32 9.60 9.44 0.50 0.45 50 266.89 319.07 762.89 1.20 1.19
25 20.72 10.66 10.88 0.51 0.47
a
After Vesic (1973)

Shape, Depth, and Inclination Factors

The relationships for the shape factors, depth factors, and inclination factors
recommended for use are shown in table 5. Other relationships generally found in many
texts and references are shown in table B-4 (appendix B).

General Comments

When the water table is present at or near the foundations, the factors 𝑞𝑞 and 𝛾𝛾 given in
the general bearing capacity equations, equation (25), will need modifications. The
procedure for modifying them is the same.

For undrianed loading conditions (𝜙𝜙 = 0 concept) in clayey soils, the general load-
bearing capacity equation [equation (25)] takes the form (vertical load)

𝑞𝑞𝑢𝑢 = 𝑐𝑐𝑁𝑁𝑐𝑐 𝐹𝐹𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝐹𝐹𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 + 𝑞𝑞 [3.29]

Table 5 Shape, Depth, and Inclination Factors Recommended for Use

Factor Relationship Source

Shape a 𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝑞𝑞 De Beer
𝐹𝐹𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 = 1 +
𝐿𝐿 𝑁𝑁𝑐𝑐 (1970
𝐵𝐵 Hansen
𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 = + tan 𝜙𝜙 (1970)
𝐿𝐿
𝐵𝐵
𝐹𝐹𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 = 1 − 0.4
𝐿𝐿
Where 𝐿𝐿 = length of the foundation (𝐿𝐿 > 𝐵𝐵)
Depth b Condition (a): 𝐷𝐷𝑓𝑓 /𝐵𝐵 ≤ 1 Hansen
𝐷𝐷𝑓𝑓 (1970
𝐹𝐹𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 = 1 + 0.4
𝐵𝐵
𝐷𝐷𝑓𝑓
𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 = 1 + 2 tan 𝜙𝜙(1 − sin 𝜙𝜙)2
𝐵𝐵
𝐹𝐹𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 = 1
Condition (b): 𝐷𝐷𝑓𝑓 /𝐵𝐵 > 1
NPTEL – ADVANCED FOUNDATION ENGINEERING-I

−1
𝐷𝐷𝑓𝑓
𝐹𝐹𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 = 1 + 2 tan 𝜙𝜙(1 − sin 𝜙𝜙) tan � �
𝐵𝐵
𝐹𝐹𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 = 1
2
Inclinatio 𝛽𝛽 ° Meyerho
n 𝐹𝐹𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 = 𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 = �1 − ° � f (1963);
90
Hanna
Where and
𝛽𝛽 = Meyerho
inclination of the load on the foundation with respect to the vertical
f (1981)
a
These shape factors are empirical relations based on extensive laboratory tests.
b
The factors 𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡−1 (𝐷𝐷𝑓𝑓 /𝐵𝐵) is in radians.

Hence the ultimate baring capacity (vertical load) is

𝑞𝑞net (𝑢𝑢) = 𝑞𝑞𝑢𝑢 − 𝑞𝑞 = 𝑐𝑐𝑁𝑁𝑐𝑐 𝐹𝐹𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝐹𝐹𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 [3.30]

Skempton (1951) proposed an equation for the net ultimate baring capacity for clayey
soils (𝜙𝜙 = condition), which is similar to equation (30) :
𝐷𝐷𝑓𝑓 𝐵𝐵
𝑞𝑞net (𝑢𝑢) = 5𝑐𝑐 �1 + 0.2 � �1 + 0.2 𝐿𝐿 � [3.31]
𝐵𝐵

Example 2

A square foundation (𝐵𝐵 × 𝐵𝐵) has to be constructed as shown in figure 3.9. Assume that
𝛾𝛾 = 105 lb/ft 3 , 𝛾𝛾sat = 118 lb/ft 3 , 𝐷𝐷𝑓𝑓 = 4 ft, and 𝐷𝐷1 = 2 ft. The gross allowable load,
𝑄𝑄all , with 𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹 = 3 is 150,000 lb. The field standard penetration resistance, 𝑁𝑁𝐹𝐹 values are
as follows:

Depth (ft) 𝑁𝑁𝐹𝐹 (blow/ft)

5 4
10 6
15 6
20 10
25 5

Determine the size of the footing. Use equation (25).

Solution

Using equation (7 from chapter 2) and the Liao and Whitman relationship (table 4 from
chaper 2), the correct standard penetration number can be determined.
NPTEL – ADVANCED FOUNDATION ENGINEERING-I

Depth 𝑁𝑁𝐹𝐹 𝜎𝜎 ′ (ton/ft 2 )

1
(ft) 𝑁𝑁cor = 𝑁𝑁𝐹𝐹 �
𝜎𝜎′𝑣𝑣
5 4 1 12
[2 × 105 + 3 × (118 − 62.4)]
2000
= 0.188
10 6 1 11
0.188 + (5)(118 − 62.4)
2000
= 0.327
15 6 1 9
0.327 + (5)(118 − 62.4)
2000
= 0.466
20 10 1 13
0.466 + (5)(118 − 62.4)
2000
= 0.605
25 5 1 6
0.605 + (5)(118 − 62.4)
2000
= 0.744

Figure 3.9

The average 𝑁𝑁cor can be taken to be about 11.

From equation 11 (from chapter 2), 𝜙𝜙 ≈ 35° . Given

Q all 150,000
𝑞𝑞all = = lb/ft 2
B2 B2
[a]

From equation (25) (note: 𝑐𝑐 = 0),

𝑞𝑞 1 1
𝑞𝑞all = 𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝑢𝑢 = 3 �𝑞𝑞𝑁𝑁𝑞𝑞 𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 + 2 𝛾𝛾′𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝛾𝛾 𝐹𝐹𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 𝐹𝐹𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 �

For 𝜙𝜙 = 35° , from table 4, 𝑁𝑁𝑞𝑞 = 33.3, 𝑁𝑁𝛾𝛾 = 48.03. From table 5,
NPTEL – ADVANCED FOUNDATION ENGINEERING-I

𝐵𝐵
𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 = 1 + 𝐿𝐿 tan 𝜙𝜙 = 1 + tan 35 = 1.7

𝐵𝐵
𝐹𝐹𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 = 1 − 0.4 � 𝐿𝐿 � = 1 − 0.4 = 0.6

4 1
𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 = 1 + 2 tan 𝜙𝜙(1 − sin 𝜙𝜙)2 = 1 + 2 tan 35(1 − sin 35)2 𝐵𝐵 = 1 + 𝐵𝐵

𝐹𝐹𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 = 1

𝑞𝑞 = (2)(105) + 2(118 − 62.4) = 321.2 lb/ft 2

So
1 1 1
𝑞𝑞all = 3 �(321.2)(33.3)(1.7) �1 + B � + �2� (118 − 62.4)(B)(48.03)(0.6)(10�

6061 .04
= 6061.04 + + 267.05𝐵𝐵
B
[b]

Combining equations (a) and (b)

150,000 6061 .04
= 6061.04 + + 267.05𝐵𝐵
𝐵𝐵 2 B

By trial and error, 𝐵𝐵 ≈ 4.2 ft

Example 3

Refer to example1. Use the definition of factor of safety given by equation (20) and
𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹 = 5 to determine the net allowable load for the foundation.

Solution

From example 1,

𝑞𝑞𝑢𝑢 = 10,736 lb/ft 2

𝑞𝑞 = (3)(115) = 345 lb/ft 2

10,736−345
𝑞𝑞all (net ) = ≈ 2078 lb/ft 2
5

Hence

𝑞𝑞all (net ) = (2078)(5)(5) = 51,950 lb

Example 4
NPTEL – ADVANCED FOUNDATION ENGINEERING-I

Refer to example 1. Use equation (7) and 𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹shear = 1.5 determine the net allowable load
for the foundation.

Solution

For 𝑐𝑐 = 320 lb/ft 2 and 𝜙𝜙 = 20° ,

𝑐𝑐 320
𝑐𝑐𝑑𝑑 = 𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹 = ≈ 213 lb/ft 2
shear 1.5

tan 𝜙𝜙 tan 20
𝜙𝜙𝑑𝑑 = 𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡−1 �𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹 � = 𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡−1 � � = 13.64°
shear 1.5

From equation (7),

𝑞𝑞all (net ) = 1.3𝑐𝑐𝑑𝑑 𝑁𝑁𝑐𝑐 + 𝑞𝑞(𝑁𝑁 − 1) + 0.4𝛾𝛾𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝛾𝛾

For 𝜙𝜙 = 13.64° , the values of the bearing capacity factors from table 1 are

𝑁𝑁𝛾𝛾 ≈ 1.2, 𝑁𝑁𝑞𝑞 ≈ 3.8, 𝑁𝑁𝑐𝑐 ≈ 12

Hence

𝑞𝑞all (net ) = 1.3(213)(12) + (345)(3.8 − 1) + (0.4)(115)(5)(1.2) = 4565 lb/ft 2

And

𝑞𝑞all (net ) = (4565)(5)(5) = 114,125 lb ≈ 57 ton

Note: There appears to be a large discrepancy between the results of examples 3 (or 1)
and 4. The use of trial and error shows that, when 𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹shear is about 1.2, the results are
approximated equal.

EFFECT OF SOIL COMPRESSIBILITY

In section 3 equation 3, 7, and 8, which were for the case of general shear failure, were
modified to equations 9, 10, and 11 to take into account the change of failure mode in soil
(that is, local shear failure). The change in failure mode is due to soil compressibility. In
order to account for soil compressibility, Vesic (1973) proposed the following
modification to equation (25),

𝑞𝑞𝑢𝑢 = 𝑐𝑐𝑁𝑁𝑐𝑐 𝐹𝐹𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝐹𝐹𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝐹𝐹𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 + 𝑞𝑞𝑁𝑁𝑞𝑞 𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 + 12𝛾𝛾𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝛾𝛾 𝐹𝐹𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 𝐹𝐹𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 𝐹𝐹𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 [3.32]

Where
NPTEL – ADVANCED FOUNDATION ENGINEERING-I

𝐹𝐹𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 , 𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 , and 𝐹𝐹𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 = soil compressibility factors

The soil compressibility factors were derived by Vesic (1973) from the analogy of the
expansion of cavities. According to that theory, in order to calculate 𝐹𝐹𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 , 𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 , and 𝐹𝐹𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 the
following steps should be taken:

1. Calculate the rigidity index, 𝐼𝐼𝑟𝑟 , of the soil at a depth approximately 𝐵𝐵/2 below the
bottom of the foundation, or
𝐺𝐺
𝐼𝐼𝑟𝑟 = 𝑐𝑐+𝑞𝑞 ′ tan 𝜙𝜙 [3.33]

Where

𝐺𝐺 = shear modulus of the soil

𝑞𝑞 ′ = effective overburden pressure at a depth of 𝐷𝐷𝑓𝑓 + 𝐵𝐵/2

2. The critical rigidity index, 𝐼𝐼𝑟𝑟(𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 ) , can be expressed as

1 𝐵𝐵 𝜙𝜙
𝐼𝐼𝑟𝑟(𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 ) = 2 �exp ��3.30 − 0.45 𝐿𝐿 � cot �45 − 2 ��� [3.34]

The variation of 𝐼𝐼𝑟𝑟(𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 ) for 𝐵𝐵/𝐿𝐿 = 0 and 𝐵𝐵/𝐿𝐿 = 1 are given in table 6.

3. If 𝐼𝐼𝑟𝑟 ≥ 𝐼𝐼𝑟𝑟(𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 ) , then

𝐹𝐹𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 = 𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 = 𝐹𝐹𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 = 1

However, if 𝐼𝐼𝑟𝑟 < 𝐼𝐼𝑟𝑟(𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 )

𝐵𝐵 (3.07 sin 𝜙𝜙) (log 2𝐼𝐼𝑟𝑟 )

𝐹𝐹𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 = 𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 = exp ��−4.4 + 0.6 𝐿𝐿 � tan 𝜙𝜙 + � �� [3.35]
1+sin 𝜙𝜙

Table 6 Variation of 𝐼𝐼𝑟𝑟(𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 ) with 𝝓𝝓 𝐚𝐚𝐚𝐚𝐚𝐚 𝑩𝑩/𝑳𝑳𝟏𝟏

𝐼𝐼𝑟𝑟(𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 )
𝜙𝜙 (deg) 𝐵𝐵 𝐵𝐵
=0 =1
𝐿𝐿 𝐿𝐿
0 13 8
5 18 11
10 25 15
15 37 20
20 55 30
25 89 44
NPTEL – ADVANCED FOUNDATION ENGINEERING-I

30 152 70
35 283 120
40 592 225
45 1442 482
50 4330 1258
1
After Vesic (1973)

Figure 3.10 shows the variation of 𝐹𝐹𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 = 𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 [equation (35)] with 𝜙𝜙 and 𝐼𝐼𝑟𝑟 . For
𝜙𝜙 = 0,
𝐵𝐵
𝐹𝐹𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 = 0.32 + 0.12 𝐿𝐿 + 0.60 log 𝐼𝐼𝑟𝑟 [3.36]

For 𝜙𝜙 > 0,
1−𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞
𝐹𝐹𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 = 𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 − 𝑁𝑁 [3.37]
𝑞𝑞 tan 𝜙𝜙

Figure 3.10 Variation of 𝐹𝐹𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 = 𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 with 𝐼𝐼𝑟𝑟 and 𝜙𝜙

Example 5

For a shallow foundation, the following are given: 𝐵𝐵 = 0.6 m, 𝐿𝐿 = 1.2 m, 𝐷𝐷𝑓𝑓 = o. 6 m.

Soil:

𝜙𝜙 = 25°

𝑐𝑐 = 48 kN/m2
NPTEL – ADVANCED FOUNDATION ENGINEERING-I

𝛾𝛾 = 18 kN/m3

Modulus of elasticity, 𝐸𝐸 = 620 kN/m2

Poisson’s ratio, 𝜇𝜇 = 0.3

Calculate the ultimate bearing capacity.

Solution

From equation (33)

𝐺𝐺
𝐼𝐼𝑟𝑟 = 𝑐𝑐+𝑞𝑞 ′ tan 𝜙𝜙

However,
𝐸𝐸
𝐺𝐺 = 2(1+𝜇𝜇 )

So
𝐸𝐸
𝐼𝐼𝑟𝑟 = 2(1+𝜇𝜇 )[𝑐𝑐+𝑞𝑞 ′ tan 𝜙𝜙]

𝐵𝐵 0.6
𝑞𝑞 ′ = 𝛾𝛾 �𝐷𝐷𝑓𝑓 + 2 � = 18 �0.6 + � = 162 kN/m2
2

620
𝐼𝐼𝑟𝑟 = 2(1+0.3)[48+16.2 tan 25] = 4.29

From equation (34)

1 𝐵𝐵 𝜙𝜙
𝐼𝐼𝑟𝑟(𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 ) = 2 �exp ��3.3 − 0.45 𝐿𝐿 � cot �45 − 2 ���

1 0.6 25
�exp ��3.3 − 0.45 1.2� cot �45 − ��� = 62.46
2 2

Since 𝐼𝐼𝑟𝑟(𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 ) > 𝐼𝐼𝑟𝑟 , use equations 35 and 37.

𝐵𝐵 (3.07 sin 𝜙𝜙) log (2𝐼𝐼𝑟𝑟 )
𝐹𝐹𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 = 𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 = exp ��−4.4 + 0.6 𝐿𝐿 � tan 𝜙𝜙 + � ��
1+sin 𝜙𝜙

0.6 (3.07 sin 25) log (2×4.29)

= exp ��−4.4 + 0.6 1.2� tan 25 + � �� = 0.347
1+sin 25

1−𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞
𝐹𝐹𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 = 𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 − 𝑁𝑁
𝑞𝑞 tan 𝜙𝜙

For 𝜙𝜙 = 25° , 𝑁𝑁𝑞𝑞 = 10.66 (table 4),

NPTEL – ADVANCED FOUNDATION ENGINEERING-I

1−0.347
𝐹𝐹𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 = 0.347 − 10.66 tan 25 = 0.216

Now, from equation (32),

𝑞𝑞𝑢𝑢 = 𝑐𝑐𝑁𝑁𝑐𝑐 𝐹𝐹𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝐹𝐹𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝐹𝐹𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 + 𝑞𝑞𝑁𝑁𝑞𝑞 𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 + 12𝛾𝛾𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵𝛾𝛾 𝐹𝐹𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 𝐹𝐹𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 𝐹𝐹𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾

From table 4, for 𝜙𝜙 = 25° , 𝑁𝑁𝑐𝑐 = 20.72, 𝑁𝑁𝑞𝑞 = 10.66, 𝑁𝑁𝛾𝛾 = 10.88. From table 5,
𝑁𝑁𝑞𝑞 𝐵𝐵 10.66 0.6
𝐹𝐹𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 = 1 + � 𝑁𝑁 � � 𝐿𝐿 � = 1 + �20.72 � �1.2� = 1.257
𝑐𝑐

𝐵𝐵 0.6
𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 = 1 + 𝐿𝐿 tan 𝜙𝜙 = 1 + 1.2 tan 25 = 1.233

𝐵𝐵 0.6
𝐹𝐹𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 = 1 − 0.4 𝐿𝐿 = 1 − 0.4 1.2 = 0.8

𝐷𝐷 0.6
𝐹𝐹𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 = 1 + 0.4 � 𝐵𝐵𝑓𝑓 � = 1 + 0.4 �0.6� = 1.4

𝐷𝐷 0.6
𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 = 1 + 2 tan 𝜙𝜙(1 − sin 𝜙𝜙)2 � 𝐵𝐵𝑓𝑓 � = 1 + 2 tan 25(1 − sin 25)2 �0.6� = 1.311

𝐹𝐹𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 = 1

Thus

𝑞𝑞𝑢𝑢 = (48)(20.72)(1.257)(1.4)(0.216) + (0.6 × 18)(10.66)(1.233)(1.311)(0.347) +

�12�(18)(0.6)(10.88)(0.8)(1)(0.347) = 459 kN/m2

ECCENTRICALLY LOADED FOUNDATIONS

In several instances, as with the base of a retaining wall, foundations are subjected to
moments in addition to the vertical load, as shown in figure 3.11a. In such cases the
distribution of pressure by the foundation on the soil is not uniform. The distribution of
nominal pressure is
𝑄𝑄 6𝑀𝑀
𝑞𝑞max = 𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵 + 𝐵𝐵 2 𝐿𝐿 [3.38]

And
𝑄𝑄 6𝑀𝑀
𝑞𝑞max = 𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵 − 𝐵𝐵 2 𝐿𝐿 [3.39]

Where

𝑄𝑄 = total vertical load

NPTEL – ADVANCED FOUNDATION ENGINEERING-I

𝑀𝑀 = moment on the foundation

Figure 3.11b shows force system equivalent to that shown in figure 3.11a. The distance e
is he eccentricity, or
𝑀𝑀
𝑒𝑒 = [3.40]
𝑄𝑄

Substituting equation (40) in equations (38) and (39) gives

𝑄𝑄 6𝑒𝑒
𝑞𝑞max = 𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵 �1 + � [3.41a]
𝐵𝐵

And
𝑄𝑄 6𝑒𝑒
𝑞𝑞max = 𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵 �1 − � [3.41b]
𝐵𝐵

Figure 3.11 Eccentrically loaded foundations

Note that, in these equations, when the eccentricity, e, becomes 𝐵𝐵/6, 𝑞𝑞max is zero. for
𝑒𝑒 > 𝐵𝐵/6, 𝑞𝑞min will be negative, which means that tension will develop. Because soil
cannot take any tension, there will be a separation between the foundation and the soil
underlying it. The nature of the pressure distribution on the soil will be as shown in figure
3.11a. the value of 𝑞𝑞max then is
4𝑄𝑄
𝑞𝑞max = 3𝐿𝐿(𝐵𝐵−2𝑒𝑒) [3.42]

The exact distribution of pressure is difficult to estimate.

NPTEL – ADVANCED FOUNDATION ENGINEERING-I

The factor of safety for such types of loading against baring capacity failure can be
evaluated by using the procedure suggested by Meyerhof (1953), which is generally
referred to as the effective area method. The following is Meyerholf a step-by-step
procedure for determination of the ultimate load that the soil can support and the factor of
safety against bearing capacity failure.

1. Determine the effective dimensions of the foundation as

𝐵𝐵 ′ = effective width = 𝐵𝐵 − 2𝑒𝑒

𝐿𝐿 = effective length = 𝐿𝐿

Note that, if the eccentricity were in the direction of the length of the foundation,
the value of 𝐿𝐿′ would be equal to 𝐿𝐿 − 2𝑒𝑒. The value of 𝐵𝐵′ would equal 𝐵𝐵. The
smaller of the two dimensions (that is, 𝐿𝐿′ and 𝐵𝐵′) is the effective width of the
foundation.

2. Use equation (25) for the ultimate bearing capacity as

𝑞𝑞′𝑢𝑢 = 𝑐𝑐𝑁𝑁𝑐𝑐 𝐹𝐹𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝐹𝐹𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝐹𝐹𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 + 𝑞𝑞𝑁𝑁𝑞𝑞 𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 + 12𝛾𝛾𝐵𝐵′𝑁𝑁𝛾𝛾 𝐹𝐹𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 𝐹𝐹𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 𝐹𝐹𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 [3.43]

To evaluate 𝐹𝐹𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 , 𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 , and 𝐹𝐹𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 , use table 5 with effective length and effective width
dimensions instead of 𝐿𝐿 and 𝐵𝐵, respectively. To determine 𝐹𝐹𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 , 𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 , and 𝐹𝐹𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 use
table 5 (do not replace 𝐵𝐵 with 𝐵𝐵′).

3. The total ultimate load that the foundation can sustain is

𝐴𝐴′
𝑄𝑄ult = ��
𝑞𝑞′����
𝑢𝑢
���
(𝐵𝐵′)(𝐿𝐿′) [3.44]

Where

𝐴𝐴′ = effective area

4. The factor of safety against bearing capacity failure is

𝑄𝑄ult
𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹 = [3.45]
𝑄𝑄

5. Check the factor of safety against 𝑞𝑞max , or, 𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹 = 𝑞𝑞′𝑢𝑢 /𝑞𝑞max .

Note that eccentricity tends to decrease the load-bearing capacity of a foundation. In such
cases, placing foundation columns off center, as shown in figure 3.12, probably is
advantageous. Doing so, in procedures a centrally loaded foundation with uniformly
distributed pressure.
NPTEL – ADVANCED FOUNDATION ENGINEERING-I

Figure 3.12 Foundation of columns with off-center loading

Foundation with Two-Way Eccentricity

Consider a situation in which a foundation is subjected to a vertical ultimate load 𝑄𝑄ult and
a moment M as shown in figure 3.13a and b. For this case, the components of the
moment, M, about the x and y axes can be determined as 𝑀𝑀𝑥𝑥 and 𝑀𝑀𝑦𝑦 respectively (figure
3.13). This condition is equivalent to a load 𝑄𝑄ult placed eccentrically on the foundation
with 𝑥𝑥 = 𝑒𝑒𝐵𝐵 and 𝑦𝑦 = 𝑒𝑒𝐿𝐿 (figure 3.13d). Note that
𝑀𝑀𝑦𝑦
𝑒𝑒𝐵𝐵 = 𝑄𝑄 [3.46]
ult

And
𝑀𝑀𝑥𝑥
𝑒𝑒𝐿𝐿 = 𝑄𝑄 [3.47]
ult

If 𝑄𝑄ult is needed, it can be obtained as follows [equation (44)]:

𝑄𝑄ult = 𝑞𝑞′𝑢𝑢 𝐴𝐴′

Where, from equation (43)

𝑞𝑞′𝑢𝑢 = 𝑐𝑐𝑁𝑁𝑐𝑐 𝐹𝐹𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝐹𝐹𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝐹𝐹𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 + 𝑞𝑞𝑁𝑁𝑞𝑞 𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 + 12𝛾𝛾𝐵𝐵′𝑁𝑁𝛾𝛾 𝐹𝐹𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 𝐹𝐹𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 𝐹𝐹𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 [3.48]

And

𝐴𝐴′ = effective area = 𝐵𝐵′𝐿𝐿′

NPTEL – ADVANCED FOUNDATION ENGINEERING-I

Figure 3.13

Figure 3.14 Effective area for the case of 𝑒𝑒𝐿𝐿 /𝐿𝐿 ≥ 16 and eB /B ≥ 16

Where
3𝑒𝑒 𝐵𝐵
𝐵𝐵1 = 𝐵𝐵 �1.5 − � [3.49a]
𝐵𝐵

3𝑒𝑒 𝐿𝐿
𝐿𝐿1 = 𝐿𝐿 �1.5 − � [3.49b]
𝐿𝐿

The effective length, L’, is the larger of the two dimensions, that is, 𝐵𝐵1 or 𝐿𝐿1 . So, the
effective width is
𝐴𝐴′
𝐵𝐵 ′ = [3.50]
𝐿𝐿′
NPTEL – ADVANCED FOUNDATION ENGINEERING-I

Case II

𝑒𝑒𝐿𝐿 /𝐿𝐿 < 0.5 and 0 < eB /B < 16 . The effective area for this condition is shown in figure
3.15a.

𝐴𝐴′ = 12(𝐿𝐿1 + 𝐿𝐿2 )𝐵𝐵 [3.51]

Figure 3.15 Effective area for the case of 𝑒𝑒𝐿𝐿 /𝐿𝐿 < 0.5 and 0 < 𝑒𝑒𝐵𝐵 /𝐵𝐵 < 16 (after Highter
and Anders, 1985)

The magnitudes of 𝐿𝐿1 and𝐿𝐿2 can be determined from figure 3.15b. The effective width is
𝐴𝐴′
𝐵𝐵 ′ = 𝐿𝐿 [3.52]
1 or 𝐿𝐿2 (which is larger )

The effective length is

𝐿𝐿′ = 𝐿𝐿1 or𝐿𝐿2 (which is larger) [3.53]

Case III
NPTEL – ADVANCED FOUNDATION ENGINEERING-I

𝑒𝑒𝐿𝐿 /𝐿𝐿 < 16 and 0 < eB /B < 0.5 . The effective area for this condition is shown in figure
3.16a:

𝐴𝐴′ = 12(𝐵𝐵1 + 𝐵𝐵2 )𝐿𝐿 [3.54]

Figure 3.16 Effective area for the case of 𝑒𝑒𝐿𝐿 /𝐿𝐿 < 16and 0 < 𝑒𝑒𝐵𝐵 /𝐵𝐵 < 0.5 (after Highter
and Anders, 1985)

The effective width is

𝐴𝐴′
𝐵𝐵 ′ = [3.55]
𝐿𝐿

The effective length is equal to

𝐿𝐿′ = 𝐿𝐿 [3.56]

The magnitude of 𝐵𝐵1 and 𝐵𝐵2 can be determined from figure 3.16b.
NPTEL – ADVANCED FOUNDATION ENGINEERING-I

Case IV

𝑒𝑒𝐿𝐿 /𝐿𝐿 < 16 and eB /B < 16. Figure 3.17a shows the effective area for this case. The ratio
𝐵𝐵2 /𝐵𝐵 and thus 𝐵𝐵2 can be determined by using the 𝑒𝑒𝐿𝐿 /𝐿𝐿 curves that slope upward.
Similarly, the ratio 𝐿𝐿2 /𝐿𝐿 and thus 𝐿𝐿2 can be determined by using the 𝑒𝑒𝐿𝐿 /𝐿𝐿 curves that
slope downward. The effective area is then

Figure 3.17 Effective area for the case of 𝑒𝑒𝐿𝐿 /𝐿𝐿 < 16and 0 < 𝑒𝑒𝐵𝐵 /𝐵𝐵 < 16(after Highter and
Anders, 1985)

𝐴𝐴′ = 𝐿𝐿2 𝐵𝐵 + 12(𝐵𝐵 + 𝐵𝐵2 )(𝐿𝐿 − 𝐿𝐿2 ) [3.57]

The effective width is

𝐴𝐴′
𝐵𝐵 ′ = [3.58]
𝐿𝐿

The effective length is

𝐿𝐿′ = 𝐿𝐿 [3.59]
NPTEL – ADVANCED FOUNDATION ENGINEERING-I

Example 6

A square foundation is shown in figure 3.18. Assume that the one-way load
eccentricity𝑒𝑒 = 0.15 m. Determine the ultimate load, 𝑄𝑄ult .

Figure 3.18

Solution

With 𝑐𝑐 = 0, equation (43) becomes

𝑞𝑞′𝑢𝑢 = 𝑐𝑐𝑁𝑁𝑞𝑞 𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 + 12𝛾𝛾𝐵𝐵′𝑁𝑁𝛾𝛾 𝐹𝐹𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 𝐹𝐹𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 𝐹𝐹𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾

𝑞𝑞 = (0.7)(18) = 12.6 kN/m2

For 𝜙𝜙 = 30° , from table 4, 𝑁𝑁𝑞𝑞 = 18.4 and 𝑁𝑁𝛾𝛾 = 22.4

𝐵𝐵 ′ = 1.5 − 2(0.15) = 1.2 m

𝐿𝐿′ = 1.5 m

From table 5
𝐵𝐵′ 1.2
𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 = 1 + 𝐿𝐿′ tan 𝜙𝜙 = 1 + �1.5� tan 30° = 1.462

𝐷𝐷𝑓𝑓 (0.289)(0.7)
𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 = 1 + 2 tan 𝜙𝜙(1 − sin 𝜙𝜙)2 = 1+ = 1.135
𝐵𝐵 1.5
NPTEL – ADVANCED FOUNDATION ENGINEERING-I

𝐵𝐵′ 1.2
𝐹𝐹𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 = 1 − 0.4 � 𝐿𝐿′ � = 1 − 0.4 �1.5� = 0.68

𝐹𝐹𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 = 1

So

𝑞𝑞′𝑢𝑢 = (12.6)(18.4)(1.462)(1.135) + 12(18)(1.2)(22.4)(0.68)(1) = 384.7 + 164.50 =

549.2 kN/m2

Hence

𝑄𝑄ult = 𝐵𝐵 ′ 𝐿𝐿′ �𝑞𝑞 ′ 𝑢𝑢 � = (1.2)(1.5)(549.2) ≈ 988kN

Example 7

Refer to example 6. Other quantities remaining the same, assume that the load has a two-
way eccentricity. Given: 𝑒𝑒𝐿𝐿 = 0.3 m, and 𝑒𝑒𝐵𝐵 = 0.15 m (figure 3.19). Determine the
ultimate load, 𝑄𝑄ult .

Figure 3.19

Solution
𝑒𝑒 𝐿𝐿 0.3
= 1.5 = 0.2
𝐿𝐿

𝑒𝑒 𝐵𝐵 0.15
= = 0.1
𝐵𝐵 1.5

This case is similar to that shown in figure 3.15a. From figure 3.15b, for 𝑒𝑒𝐿𝐿 /𝐿𝐿 =
0.2 and eB /B = 0.1
𝐿𝐿1
≈ 0.85; 𝐿𝐿1 = (0.85)(1.5) = 1.275 m
𝐿𝐿
NPTEL – ADVANCED FOUNDATION ENGINEERING-I

And
𝐿𝐿2
≈ 0.21; 𝐿𝐿2 = (0.21)(1.5) = 1.315 m
𝐿𝐿

From equation (51)

𝐴𝐴′ = 12(𝐿𝐿1 + 𝐿𝐿2 )𝐵𝐵 = 12(1.275 + 0.315)(1.5) = 1.193 m2

From equation (53)

𝐿𝐿′ = 𝐿𝐿1 = 1.275 m

From equation (52)

𝐴𝐴′ 1.193
𝐵𝐵 ′ = = 1.275 = 0.936 m
𝐿𝐿′

Note, from equation (43) for 𝑐𝑐 = 0

𝑞𝑞′𝑢𝑢 = 𝑐𝑐𝑁𝑁𝑞𝑞 𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 + 12𝛾𝛾𝐵𝐵′𝑁𝑁𝛾𝛾 𝐹𝐹𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 𝐹𝐹𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 𝐹𝐹𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾

𝑞𝑞 = (0.7)(18) = 12.6 kN/m2

For 𝜙𝜙 = 30° , from table 4, 𝑁𝑁𝑞𝑞 = 18.4 and 𝑁𝑁𝛾𝛾 = 22.4. Thus

𝐵𝐵′ 1.936
𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 = 1 + � 𝐿𝐿′ � tan 𝜙𝜙 = 1 + �1.275 � tan 30° = 1.424

𝐵𝐵′ 1.936
𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 = 1 − 0.4 � 𝐿𝐿′ � = 1 − 0.4 �1.275 � = 0.706

𝐷𝐷𝑓𝑓 (0.289)(0.7)
𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 = 1 + 2 tan 𝜙𝜙(1 − sin 𝜙𝜙)2 = 1+ = 1.135
𝐵𝐵 1.5

𝐹𝐹𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 = 1

So

𝑞𝑞ult = 𝐴𝐴′ 𝑞𝑞′𝑢𝑢 = 𝐴𝐴′ (𝑞𝑞𝑁𝑁𝑞𝑞 𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 𝐹𝐹𝑞𝑞𝑞𝑞 + 12𝛾𝛾𝐵𝐵 ′ 𝑁𝑁𝛾𝛾 𝐹𝐹𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 𝐹𝐹𝛾𝛾𝛾𝛾 =
(1.193)[(12.6)(18.4)(1.424)(1.135) + (0.5)(18)(0.936)(22.4)(0.706)(1)] =
605.95 kN