Chapter3 i SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS IT tn s Introduction ‘To perform satisfactorily, shallow foundations must have two main charac- teristics: 41. The foundation should be safe against overall shear failure in the soil ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY OF SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS Figure 3.12, Ata ce qs 2 sudden failure in the soil supporting the coundation will take place, and the failure surface in the soil will extend to the gound surface. This load per ‘unit area, g,» is usually referred to as the ulrimare bearing capacity of the ‘foundation. When this type of sudden failure in soil takes place, accompa nied by the extension of the failure surface to the ground surface, i is called the general shear failure. 3.2 Utimate Bering Copaciy 121 Settlement B Loadlunit area, ¢ surface o aol ang capac aun) parr he re (0) uchng hart (ean a Vase, 173). he per nit are enh onda song gl tg ‘ment will be accompanied by slidden jerks. A considerable movement of the Beyond this point, an increase of load will be accompanied increase of foundation settlement. The load per unit area ofthe f122 ‘Chapter SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS , te that & pak This sealed the uy)» is refered to as the first failure load (Vesicy 1 D, = relative density of sand ‘Dy = depth of foundation measured from the ground surface pr = BE en) where B= width of foundation L = length of foundation (Note: L is always greater than B.) For square foundations, B= L; for circular foundations, B = L =di- ameter, So Bre 62 Relative dent, D, og 04 0680 mching shear Eee shear \= Figure 3.2. Modes of foundation flare insane (after Vai, 1972) 3.3 ‘Terzagh's Being Capacity Theory 123 For foundations located at a shallow depth (that is, small D,/B*), the 15-25% of the width of foundation (B). Terzaghi’s Bearing Capacity Theory ‘Terzaghi (1943) was the frst to present a comprehensive theory for the continuo, ot stripy foendation (that is, ofthe foundation approaches zero) the fulure surface (where 7 = unit weight of soil). The failure zone under the foundation can, ‘be separated into three parts (cee Figure 3. 1. The sriangular zone ACD iomediately under the foundation 2. The radial shear zones ADF and CDE, with the curves DE and DF ‘wo triangular Rankine passive zones AFH and CEG wamed that the angles CAD and AGD are equal tothe soil fri ‘Note that with the replacement ofthe sil above the bottom of the foundation by an equivalent surcharge g, the shea resistance ofthe soil slong the failure surfaces GI and HF was neglected. Unit weight = ‘Cohesion = Friction angle = Figure 82 Beating capacity failure in soll under a ough gid continuous foundation124 CChaptor3 SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS Using the equilibrium analysis, Terzaghi expressed the ultimate bearing capacity in the form 4. =eN,+aN +5 78N, | (trip foundation) 63) where ¢= cohesion of soil 17 = unit weight of soil a=W, Ns Neo N, = bearing capacity factors that are nondimensional and are only functions of the sil friction angle, “The bearing capacity factors, N,, N,, and N, are defined by the fllow- {ng equations: neal: ¢ 7" G4) saat] enamine N= es) ta (+2) eR x=i(4 5 1) un tan ¢ 65) where K,, = passive pressure coefficient ‘The variations of the bearing capacity factors defined by Eq, (3.3) ae given, in Figure 3.4. For estimation of the ultimate bearing capaci ‘foundations, Eq, (3.1) may be modified to the followi = 13eN, +9N,+047BN, | (square foundation) | (3.7) 4.=13eN, + 4N,+0.3BN, | (circular foundation) 3.8) is equal to the dimension of each side of the foundation; in equal to the diameter of the foundation. Teaghis Being Capcity Theory 125 1009 100 zl = iB g ot { mT OM 40 i rb = 0; N, = 5.7- E fe-on,-7 1 o=0N,=0 al ° 10 2 2 rr Angle of friction of ail, (eg) Figure 3.4. Teraagh's beating capacity factors or general hear falure—Ea, (3.3) For foundations that exhibit the local shear fi zaghi suggested the following modifications to E ‘mode in soils, Ter- 1), and (38): 2 1 4-5 6N aN, +5 7BN, (strip foundation) oy 44 =0.6TEN; +gN,+04yBN, (Square foundation) 3.10) = OBSTCN, +N, +037BN, (Circular foundation) 3.11) 1d N, are the modified bearing capacity factors. They can be by using the bearing capacity factor equations (for N,, N,, and128 CChapter3 SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS 100 = co 4 BG a Si 2 0 xi 4 2 i B= ON BI re E lesox-f » 10 jee a = Pao Ro alt ° 10 20 0% LN, with the soil friction angle, Based on the experi (also see Ismael and Vesic, tions in granular soil is underestimated by Terzaghi' 4 Moda of toning Capacy Equation Wat Table 127 Itis better represented by the equation given by Vesic (1963): N="! tan? («+9) @aa) ‘The values of Ny as calculated from Eq, (3.12) are given in Table 3.1 ' For comparison purposes, thes values are also plotted in Figure 3.5 3.4 Modification te Bearing Capacity Equations q = effective surcharge = D1 + DCm — 7.) G13) here ty, = saturated unit weight of soi Ye = unit weight of water ‘Also, the value of 7 in the last term of the equations has to be replaced, by = tar Ye Figure 3.8. Modification of bering cepecty equations for water table128 Chapter SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS Case IT: For ground water table located in such a way that 0s d< B, q= Dy Gus) ‘The factor 7 in the last term of the beating capacity equations must be replaced by the factor (3.15) ‘The preceding modifications are based on the assumption that there is no seepage force in the soil. Case IIT: When the ground water table is located such that d > B, the ‘water will have no effect on the ultimate bearing capacity. Example 3.1 failure occurs in the sol Solution From Ea. (3.7) = ISN, +N, + OBN, $= 20" N74 Ny=5 ‘Thus 4) + @AXITSXISYS) 2535 Nt So, allowable load per unit area ofthe andation = 335 fe 133.75 KN} a Fe wh ‘This, the total allowable 0 =(133.15)8" = ¥ 1.5) = 300.9 = 300 EN = 38 3.5 Gener Bearing Capecty Equation 129 Example 3.2 Repeat Example 3.1, assuming thit local shear failure occurs in the soil supporting the foundation. Solution r+ aN, + O47BN, + @AXITAKLSXLT at Allowable gross load = Q = (g)(B*) = (61.9X1.5*) = 139 KN General Bearing Capacity Equation ‘The ute baring copay equations prevaed in ay (23,0, and G.8) are for continuous, square, and circular acidrest the case of rectangular foundation account, the following form of general bearing capacity equation has been suggested by Meyerhof (1963). where ¢= cohesion = effective stress at the level of the bottom of foundation ‘y= unit weight of soil ‘B= width of foundation (= diameter fora circular foundation)‘chapter SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS Fg Eyes Fy) = Joad inclination factors N,N, N, = beating capacity factors ‘The equations for determination of the various factors given in Ea. will be briefly summarized in the following sections. Note that the “equation for ultimate bearing capacity is derived only for plane-srin case {thats 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 done on bearing capacity, irface in soil as suggested by Ter~ chang: Je will lso change from those 2, the relations for N, and N, can be gn @.18) “Te equation for N, given by Ea. (3.18) was orginally derived by Prandtl and the relation for N {Ea- was presented by Reissner Gaquot and Kerisel (1953) and Vesic (1973) have given the relation G19) “The variation of the preceding bearing capacity factors with soil friction angles is given in Table 3.2. Tn many texts and reference books, the relationship for N, may be Jended differently as compared with Eq. (3.19). This is because there ‘some controversy about the variation of N, with the soil friction angle, 6. In this texty Eg, (3.19) cil be used. Other relationships frequently found in various texts and references are shown in Table 3:3. 35 131 “ ° *132 CChapter3 SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS legate rin OT oe x-mas i 8) om Hansen (1970) Nya1aN Dad 24.0.1) $edalli c7/Absintaaatne deta nianiagasiaioaiaoeeeee ‘By numerial methods from theory of plsicicy Lundgren and Morensen $6) x, 0955) “The relationships for the shape factors, depth factors, and inclination factors recommended for use inthis text are shown in Table 3.4. Other relationships ‘generally found in many texts and references are shown in Table 35. Net Ultimate Bearing Capacity Goan = Ga 1 where goa = Het ultimate bearing capacity General Comments ‘When the water table is present at or near the foundation, the factors qand 7 given in the general bearing capacity equation will need modifications. The ‘procedure for modifying them is the same as that described in Section 3.4. General Bearing Capacity Equation 133, ‘Table 24 Shap, Depth, and lnsintion Factors Racommunded for Use Hansen (1970) * Te shape as eet aos bed oa exes ibn te ‘Theta an Dy) ia ds For undrained loading conditions (# = 0 concept) in clayey soils, the feel load-bearing capacity equation [Eq. (3.16)] takes the form (vertical WN Fy Fa to 21) Hence, the net ultimate bearing capacity is equal to (vertical losd) Gout) = 4 9= ON Fas Fe (22)Chapter SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS ‘Tobie 35 Shope, Doph, end incinain Factors Reconmended in ‘iter este and Roerenene _—_— aoe Resontip Source pe ae Sept For =O Meyesbot (1953) nove renin) “alle or) AER sete ae VE) Sd \ ape?) SEES eee Deh For b= 0: Meyechot (1963) » essa roetoe() Fyn Fant Fag zlo ; a 140%) a0(+9) rerrsedg)on(ord) Fen Fy wr hei(2) (22) (2) m (os? SEES se) EI ace ama ere sap ref garaces| _F,-_@@asa8_} [getter ese vese eens CHL SR Pp eek Eee “Looe (2B) ‘Skempton (1951) has proposed the following equatic ‘mate bearing capacity for clayey soils (# = 0 condition), Eq. 6.22) D, B oH 2 2 23) Guay = 54 1 +02 Bi)(i+02 2) 23) Example 3.3 ‘A square column foundation la to carry a gross allowable total load of 150 KN, ‘The ‘donth of the Foundation is 0.7 m, The load is inctined at an angle of 20° to the 35 General Bearing Capacity Eqution 135 Q=1304N on m a Figure 37 eno o> 50° y= BRN /t vertical (Figure 3.7) Determine the width ofthe foundation, B. Use Ea. (3. factor of safety of 3. Solution ‘With c= 0, the ukimate bearing capacity [Eq, (3.16)] becomes, 1 16 = ON Fp Fatt 5 YBN, Fy Fay From Table 34, , rente(t) ange tsetretan ryote) noe ryet tte gan gp Mf 4 ORMOD. 222 a1 B a rol B) Bom nef 3} oo 4-02.98, sais +2205 + 0518 22.490.4030.1 Hence =7122+ 83) 3p @136 By rial and error, B = 1.3m Copter SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS Tins ankenne Peso. ® Given Q = tot allowable load = Guy we © auaing te rightand sie of Ea.) and (©) 499 1 BO as734 BPs soe Bet 8 The Factor of Safety In the preceding problems, in order to calculate the gross allowable load- bearing capacity of shallow foundations, a factor of safety (FS) has been applied to the gross ultimate bearing capacity, that is a mee 3.24) "FS 3.24) However, some practicing engincers prefer to use 2 factor of safety as 8.25) ‘Net ultimate bearing capacity has been defined in Eq. (3.20) as oan) = Go 4 ‘Substituting this equation in Eq, (3.25), one obtains net stress increase on soil = load from the superstructure per unit area ofthe foundation ana Seat! 26 se = e209 ‘The factor of safety as defined by Eq. (3.26) may be kept at least about 3 in alleaes “Another type of factor of safety for the bearing capacity of shallow foundations is often used. This is the factor of safety with respect to shear failure (PSaqa) In most cates, a value of FSjqy = 14-16 is deo ale tlong with 2 minim factor of safsry of 3~4 agaist gross. or net ulinate tearing capacity. In order to calculate the net allowable load onthe basis of agiven FS,yqe> the following procedure should be adopted: 4. Let cand ¢ be the cohesion and the angle of fiexon of si and et Si be the required factor of suey with respect to aber fallure, So, 3.6 Tho Factor of Safoty 137 i the developed cohesion and the angle of friction can be given as oO F8e -1 (and snow (ES) 2. The gross allowable bearing capacity can now be calculated accord- (G3), 0.7), G8) or the general bearing capacity equation (Ea. cq and das the shear strength parameters of the soi. For ., the gross allowable bearing capacity of a continuous foundation according to Terzagh's equation canbe written as G27) G28) 1 dan = aN, + 4N, +5 YBN, 3.29) rhere N., Ny and N, = bearing capacity factor fo friction ange 3. The net allowable bearing cpaciy i thus dauey = fan 9 Ne + AND 45 BN, - 630) Irrespective of the procedure by which the factor of safety is applied, the ‘magnitude of FS should depend on the uncertainties and risks involved for a given condition. Example 3.4 Refer Example 3. Determine the net allowable lad fo the foundation wing the Aefinition of factor of safety given by Eq. (3.26). Use FS = 4, Solution 178. = 129.3 KNimt Que = (129 3XL.5YLS) © 291 KN Example 3.5 Refer to Example 3,1. Determine the net allowable load for the foundation using a ' FSsou = 15.138 37 Chapter SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS Solution Given e= 15, wool} aN, +40 + 0488, or = 1364 the les ofthe raring apc corr a flows (Piute340: N,=2 Nj=38 N= 8 — 1) + @AKITSXISIA) Qay = 229.23K0-SNL5) = 515.8 KN Nore: These appears to bea lage diecrepancy between the rel of Examples 3.4 (or bl) and 35. By trial and error, it canbe shown that when FSi, about 2 the results will be approximately equal. = Eccentrically Loaded Foundations In several instances, such as with the base of a retaining wall, foundations are subjected to moments in addition to the vertical load, as shown in Figure 3.84. In such case, the distribution of pressure by the foundation on the soil js not uniform. The distribution of nominal pressure can be given by a= tom = pt BEL G31) and a2 fon BE BL 32) ‘where Q = toal vertical load ‘M =moment on the foundation ‘The exact distribution of pressure is dificult to estimate. “The factor of safety for such types of loading against bearing capacity failure can be evaluated by using the procedure suggested by Meyerhof (1953), which is generally referred to as the effective area method. The fol- lowing is Meyethof"s step-by-step procedure for determination of the ulti- 37 Eecencaly Loaded Foundations 139 Fore B/6 Sh ® ® Figure 3:8 Ecconically loaded foundations ‘mate load that the soil can support and the factor of safety against bearing 41. Figure 3.8b shows a force system equivalent to that shown in Figure 3.84. The distance eis the eccentricity, or 4-2 @ Substituting Eq. (3.33) in Eqs. (331) and (3.52) gives 033) (34a) (3.340)140 (Chapter SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS [Note that in these equations when the eccentricity, ¢ becomes equal will be negative, which “cannot take any tension, ition and the soil underlying it. The nature ofthe pressure distribution onthe toil wil be as shown in Figure 3.8a. The value of ¢,,4, can be given by the expression __42 fom 5B ~20) 2, Determine the effective dimensions ofthe foundation at B’ = effective width = B —2e = effective length = L Note that, if the eccentricity were in the direction of the length of the foundation, the value of L’ would be equal to L— 2, The value of B would be equal to B, The smaller of the two dimensions (that is, L’ and 2B) is the effective width ofthe foundation. ‘3. Use Eq. (3.16) for the ultimate bearing capacity as G35) GN FyFaFa tN FaPuFg +E IBN FyFuFy 036) For the evaluation of F, jective length and effec tively For determination of Fy, Fy, and Fp, use Table 3.4 (do not replace Bwith BD. 4. The total ultimate load that the foundation can sustain is oe un = (BOL) an where 4’ = effective area 5, The factor of safety against bearing capacity failure is given as "y and F,,, Table 34 has to be used with dth dimensions in place of L and B, respec FS= - 638) ‘As we can see, eccentricity tends to decrease the a7 ccantcally Loaded Foundations aM (ane at Toad Quy, placed eccentrically on the foundation with x= ey and y=, (Figure 3.104). Note that il | +$—_—2—+! © © © Figure 210 Anais of foundation wih two-way ecenticy 3.39) 40)142 (Chapter SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS Ifitis necessary to find Qu, it can be obtained as follows [Ea. (3.37)]: Qu = de A’ where, from Eq. (3.36) 1 A= N FoF Fa + ON FFF + 5 IBN, FFP and A= effective area = BL’ [As before, for evaluation of F,, Fs and F, (Table 3.4), use the effec: tive I of L and B, respect calculating Fy, Py, and Fy, use Table 3.43 however, do not replace B with B’. In determining the effective area (A'), effective width (B), and effective length (L', four possible cases may arise. They are dis- ‘cussed below (Highter and Anders, 1985). Case I: e,)L > and ¢g/B = 4. The effective area for this condition is shown in Figure 3.11, or oan s-a(3-%) aay fis) wa Effective Figure 3.11 Effective ars forthe case ofl 2 Ygandey/8 2" a7 Eccanticlly Loaded Foundations Effective length, L', is equal to the larger of the two dimensions, or Ly. So, effective width is equal to ps Tr Case I: JL < 05 and 0 < eq/B < fy. The effective area for this case is G43) B= Aa (hy + LB 44) Effective Geaaeeer scent! al Ae Hf the ratio of HIB is relatively small, failure in ill take place by punching in the top soil jure in the bottom soil layer, as shown in HIB is relatively large, the failure ‘contained in the top soil for such a case (Meyerhof ‘an be expressed as 23") ies ‘From general shear From punching failure failure of bottom of top soil layer soil ayer {10¢2)fom-.0, os ae ‘From general shear failure of top soil layer where B = width of foundation L = length of foundation N, = 5.4 (bearing capacity factor for ¢ = 0: ¢,= adhesion along the interface aa’ ‘The variation of [eqs With C4n/¢yay is shown in Figure 3.19. 38 ‘Sem Special Cases of Utiate Bewing Copacity 181 H,xB ‘Note that N, =5.14 since $ = 0 (Table 3.2). Foundations on Dense or Compacted Sand Overlying Soft Clay152 Chapter SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS 120. Foundation on compacted sand layer overlying sot cley with amaximum of en }ian,+90,%, as Se 7 = unit weight of sand K, = punching shear resistance coefficient Xn ee i 2 ae agen a aceneniteres respectively, ia the upper sand layer. This corresponds to the condition shown in the right half of Figure 3.20. 38 Some Special Cass of Una Basing Caacy 183 7 aN Site De N,N, 04, cat oz, Et Tt} ts w a 30 $ (dex) Figure 321. Vaation of, wih based on Meyrht and Hone's theo Example 3.8 [Refer to Figure 3.17. A foundation 1.5 m x 1 mis locsted ata depth (D,) of | m ina clay, A soft clay layer is located ata depth (H) of 1 m measured from the bottom of the foundation, Given: For top clay aye: ‘Unudrained shear strength = 120 EN? ‘Unit weight = 16.8 kN/m* For bottom clay yer: ‘Undrained shear strength = 48 Nm? Unit weight = 16.2 RN Determine the gros allowable load forthe foundation with a factor of sfery of 4 Solution Given: egy = 120 KN); a-[1+03(2)} 4[1+03(2) 248 WN’, Since cut > 1 Ba aie (92)2 0, aN + 1.Dy‘Chapt 3 SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS N/m? From Figure 3.19, fo qa) = 48/120 = 0.4 the valu of ey * 0.9.80 64 = (OSY120) = 108 KN) ween (ofe -[!+02(5) boon +(1+7 + joao = 279.6 +360 + 16.8 = 656.4 KN/en? 80 Now check: ~[:+02(5) fpane.0 +068 nope 58 EN So, g,= 656.4 kN /m? (that is, the smaller ofthe two value calculated above) ‘Total allowable load is apt « 15) = 246.15 KN Ih Example 3.9 [Refer to Figure 320. Given: Forsand: 7s IT Ibe? oo" Forely: y= 400 bjt 3.9 “Types of Foundation Setemant 155 For foundation Ba3t Laas D,=3ft Hash Determine the gross ultimate bearing capacity ofthe foundatioa. Solution ‘Since the foundation is rectangular, Eas. (3.60) and (3.61) will apply. For $= 40°, from Table 32, N= From Using Ea 250) o-fomdif(iRsstm -[s02(2)}osi0+(1+2)umn0 , for &N,pN, = 0.16 and 4 = 40", the value of K, = 3.1. «fe 2 came = 2330 + 6763 + 351 = 9444 Ibjft? ‘Again, from Eq. (3.61) eal? e-![1-4(2)}an,r0,m Paden tte 4 09[1—00(2)ranay + aan = 14,081 + 22,534 = 36,615 Ib/ft? Hence’ {ih a= 9444 wot SETTLEMENT OF SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS ‘Types of Foundation Settlement Foundation settlement under load can be classified according to two major types: immediate or elastic, settlement, S,, and consolidation serilement, S,. Immediate settlement of a foundation takes place during or immediately after the construction of the structure, Consolidation settlement is time186 3.10 Chapter. SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS supporting it be p, and E,, respectively. Theoretically, if Dy =0, H =, and the foundation is perfectly flexible, the settlement can be expressed as follows (Harr, 1966): (3.62) (3.83) (3.68) 3.65) = length of foundation ‘The values of « for various length-to-width (L/B) ratios are shown in Figure 3.23. The average immediate settlement for a flexible foundation can also be expressed as 1 | (average for flexible foundation) (3.66) 410 mmodite Sectemont o 187 igure 3.22 is rigid, the imme- sia setdement wl be modied and canbe expressed as 67)an Chapter? SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS ‘The preceding equations for immediate setlement have been obtained ‘below the foundations for limits fer of rock is located at a limited that calculated by the preced~ ing equations. However, if the depth H in Figure 3.22 is greater than about 2B to 3B, the actual settlement would not change considerably. Also note ‘that the deeper the embedment, D,., the less isthe total elastic settlement. Immediate Settlement of Foundations on Saturated Clay Janbu, Bjerrum, and Kjzernsli (1956) proposed an equation for evaluation of ‘the average settlement of fl foundations on saturated clay soils (Poisson's ratio, 4,= 0.5). Referring to Figure 3.24 for notations, this eque- ton can be written 2s 3.68) ina function of Dy/B. ‘have modified the values of 4, and A, to 0 5 10 1s 2 DB Figure 3124. Vaues ofA, and A or lac steenclueton— Ea (2 (ater Chi ton ond arr, 1978) i cee 3.12 Immediat Setoment of Sandy Sell: Use of 159 20 f Lane 4s 5 4, 19} =F Square Gide ie 7 ul 10 HB lement of Sandy Soil: nce Factor semi-empirical strain influence factor (Figure 3.25) proposed by Schmert- ‘mann and Hartman (1978). According to this method, the settlement can be given by the equation (3.69) = 1 +02 log (time in years/0.1) 4 = stress at the level of the foundation q= Dy ‘The variation of the strain influence factor with depth below the foun- dation is shown in Figure 3.252, Note that, for square or circular founda160 (Chapter SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS Young’: modulus, » Figure 3.25 Eastcsotirnentcaleulaton by using sain influence factor ‘Similarly for foundations with L/B > 10, where B = width of the foundation and L = length of the foundation. For values of L/B between 1 and 10, necessary interpolations can be made, In order to use Eq. (3.69), one first needs to evaluate the approximate viriation of Young’s modulus with depth (Figure 3.25b). This can be done by using the standard penetration numbers or cone penetration resistances ‘The sum of the settlement of all layers is equal to S,. The principle of settlement Calculation using this procedure is demonstrated in Example 3.10. rameters for Computing t Sections 3.10-3.12 presented the equations for the calculation of immediate settlement of foundations. These equations contain the elastic parameters, such as E, and p,. If the laboratory test results for these parameters are not 3.13 Range immedi ae d t t f 1 ' 319 Range of Materl Parameters for Computing Immediate Setlement 161 available certain realistic assumptions have to be made. Table 3.6 shows the ‘approximate range of the elastic parameters for various soils. Table 3.6. Ease Parametrs of Various Sot Youngs modulus, , “Type of wt Mat efi? 100-3300 1035- 2415 1725-7106 @.10) where N = standard penetration number In English units E (U.S. ton/ft?) = 8N G7) Similarly E=%, @.12) where g, = static cone penetration resistance ‘Note: Any consistent set of units can be used in Eq, (3.72). ‘The Young's modulus of normally consolidated clays can be estimated E,= 250¢ 10 5000 673) For overconsolidated clays E,= 750e 0 1000 7) where ¢ = undrained cohesion of clayey soil162 Chapter. SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS Example 3.10 Figure 3.260 shows «sballow foundation on « deposit of sandy soll that is 3m x 3 m in plan. The actual variation of the values of Young's modulus with depth deter- ‘mined by using the standard penetration numbers of Eq. (3:70) are also shown in Figure 3.260, Using the strain influence factor method, estimate the settlement of the foundation five yeas after construction, Solution By observing the actual variation of Young's modus with depth, one can plot an ‘estimated idealized form of the variation of E,, a5 shown in Figure 3.26, Figure 5.26» shows the plot of the strain influence facor. The following table can now be prepared, Figure 3.25 4314 InmediteSetement of Eocentizally Loaded Foundetions 163 3.14 Immediate Settlement of Eccentrically Loaded Foundations lement calculation procedure described in Sections 3.10, 3.11, and ptt (Q) al Ue hd eer be required to determine the settlement, S,, and “igure 3.27 for notations). 2, The ultimate load, Quy; thatthe foundation can sustin can be evaluated by using Eq. (3.37) [Section 3.75 note the change of notation from Quy 10 Que) +3. Determine the factor for safety for the eccentrically loaded founda- tion ss Fs= Se =F, 675) 4, Determine the ultimate load Q.teco)f0F the eccentricity e = 0 [centrally loaded foundation ; Ec 8. Determine: foundation with Senect- 0, @76) is the allowable load for the foundation with a factor of safety FS = F, for central loading condition. 6. For the load Q,,.9) on the foundation, using the techniques presented in Sections determined by any one of the methods be equal to ¢ settlement by the settlement(Chapter 9 SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS. 3.14 Immediate Setimant of Esentically Loaded Foundations 165 7. Now, use the following equations to determine S, and t: S= Seal - 3] am i sone soa fes(-42)] =un [es. aL (G.78) where C=B,B, 3.79) Bx» By = factors dependent on the L/B ratio (3.80) (Lee, 1963; Whitman and Richart, 1967) Figure 3.28 shows the variation off» » and C. Note that the factor {By is related to vertical displacement and the factor f, is related to the rotation of the foundation. Example 3.11 ‘A square foundation is shown in Figure 329. Ic is subjected to a load of 180 KN and 1 moment of 27 kNem. Determine the settlement of the foundation (S, and 1) according tothe method presented in Section 3.14 Solution Step 1 Given: Q= 180 KN and moment=M=27 kN-m, load eccentricity = ¢= MM) Q=27/180 = 0.15 m, 190kN, * Is F,= 150001 /m* S543 4s ee pe sane) Figure 3.28 Variation off, Ba. end C with 1/8Chmpor3 SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS Step 2 “The magaitud of Qua has been clelted in Example 3.6 oF aug = 988 2 Step 3 Determization of factor of fey, F: From Ea. 0.75) 0 =F, = 2a EEN 5.49 Factor af safety = Fy = nl = Stop 4 ‘Determination of Ogye-0)? From Ba. (3.16), because ¢= 0, 1 ton ON FaFast 5 1BN FF ¢= 126 KN? From = 30° (from Table 32),Ny= 184and N, = 2.4 From Teble3.4, rat + Bean gn +(12) 0030 «1577 13, Dy. 4 028900: eS asin op Beet + Fyne 2 tan gt sin gy Btw 1 SES rant 08) 1-003) -06 <-czsnuansm.in + ("oe a0.) (= 414.97 + 181.44 = 59641 KN]? So Qannty = (S9BAIXIS X 1.5) = 1342 EN ; Step 5 Step 6 ‘Determination of Sy: From Eq, (3.67) | _ BQ..0) Sewn FBX D a-H, 3.15 Consolidation Setlement 167 Stop 7 From Bq. (3.77) =@1 From Eq, (3.78) rean'[es B)) For BIL = 1, C= 395 (rom Figure 3.28), So ~ @X0.)F = $18 mm i ‘As mentioned before, consolidation settlement is time dependent, and it occurs in saturated clayey soils when they are subjected to increased load Depth, = Figure 3.20 Coneoidation etlement caleultion168 Chapter3 SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS caused by foundation construction (Figure 3.30). Thhe one-dimensional con- solidation settlement equations are given in Chapter 1 as face _ Ae “Tre ‘Ae = change of woid ratio =S(Pe» Pes and bp) So 5, = GH jog 2% MP0 Gor normally consolidated clays) (1.65) S.= (for overconsolidated clays z ith 9, + AP 1.22 m and 25.4 mm of settlement) 3.1056) where N = corrected standard penetration number Note that in the orecedine ecuations190 (Chapter3 SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS In English units onan psi) = or B= 489) (6.1063) and furan (psi?) =% Gey (for B> 4) @.1068) 1cc Meyerhof proposed his correlation, researchers have observed that its results are rather conservative. Bowles (197) suggested that the net allowable bearing pressure should be increased by about 50%. The modified e107) fae 3.288 +1\2, (8 Aono Nn?) = 1190 S21) S) (Gor B> 1.22 m 107) wise Hy depth ator = 1 +0340 18) 1.33 RGN tuaun psf?) = 2 FS (or B44) 21080 eas kip?) “2 y, F,S (for B>4h) (3.109) ‘where F, is given by Eq, (3.108) and S = tolerable settlement, in inches. ‘The empirical relations just presented may raise some questions: for adopted, and what is the effect of the water table on the net allowable bearing capacity? The design value of NV should be determined by taking {nto account the N values for a depth of 2B to 3B, measured from the Meyerhof (1956) also prepared empirical relations for the net allowable bearing capacity of foundations based on the cone penetration resistance Qo: 4 ig (for Bs 1.22 mand settlement of 25.4 mm) @.110) ! fi I | ! i I | i 318 ‘Alowable Bering Preseur in Sand Based on Setlemont Consideration 191 and 3.288 +1 sown (Sa) (for B > 122m and settlement of 254mm) (3.111) In the preceding two equations, the unit of B is meters and the units of ety 24g, are KN). a. bff) 5 (GoeB 4ftand setlement fin) (1128) In Eq. 3.112), the unit of B is feet. 6 to ; [ § i nea i : neal i i / w=al : a wen i] & N=sS Figure 348. Cove lowabl baring capac sar wth stand m etirorts nl exeoeiigT (25:4 mn) (at Peck, faneon, and Thom ‘(Continud en page 182)Netallowable bearing capacity, uaa (toni) Netallowable bearing capacity, qa an(tonvte) N= N=15| N=10 Nes ima z © Foundation width, (18) Foundation width, B (At) ‘Allowable Bearing Pressure in Sand Besed on Setlement Consideration 193 ‘The basic philosophy behind the development of these correlations is thet, if the maximum settlement is no more than 25.4 mm (1 in.) for any foundation, the differential settlement would be no more than 19.05 mm (‘/, in). ‘These are probably the allowable limits for most building foundation designs. Peck, Hanson, and Thorburn (1974) have also provided charts of ues for foundations on sand of varying widths (B), standard penetration numbers (N), and D,/B. These are given in Figure 3.45a, b, values Of daqunOtrespond toa maximum settlement of 25.4 mm (I in). Example 3.16 A shallow square foundation for a column vertical load of 1000 KN. The foundati ap Field standard + + # ‘penetration “ta = IBSEN]? Depth (m) Figure 3.46 Solution ‘The field standard penetration numbers need to be corrected by wing Ea. (2.6). ‘This is done i the following table,SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS From the ble, it appears that «corrected average NV value of about 10 would be i Eq. G.107b) sano) Allowable $= 25.4 mm and N'= 10. $0 mt), tunan = 1907 ‘The following table can now be prepared for trial calculations, 2 tage imately equal to 2.4 m. the ne allowable load is by using the ultimate bearing capacity equation (Eq. 3.16] with B =2.4:m, 319 Fld Load Test 195 From Table 34 fects (t)mnse-ua e rent s0aef!3) 1 = (15.7 x19) 8 4464.14 — 23.55 = 1792 KN/oat 1792 x BP = 1792 x 2.4 = 10,322 KN 1000 = 10.3. This demonstrates that, in most cases, the design is controlled erable sextlement criterion. = Mt 3.19 Field Load Test ‘The ultimate load-bearing capacity of a foundation, as bearing capacity based on tolerable settlement consi ‘plate load test (ASTM Test Designation D-1 ‘used for tests in the field are usually made out and 150:mm to 722 mm in diameter. Occasionally, square plates that are 205 ‘mm x 305 mm are also used. To conduct a plate load ameter 4B (B = diameter of the settlement of the plate is observed using dial gauges, At least one hour lapses after the application of each step load before the next load is epplied. ‘The test should be conducted until failure, or at least until the plate has ‘gone through 25 mm of settlement. Figure 3.47b shows the nature of the Joad-settlement curve obtained from such tests, from which the ultimate load per unit area can be determined. For tests in clay an = Guy @.113) where gun = ultimate bearing capacity of the proposed foundation ary = ultimate bearing capacity ofthe test plate196 CChocter3 SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS ‘Load/unit area Setlement o Figure 347 Patload tert: () test arangement;(b) nature of load-setdement cuve Equation (3.113) implies that the ultimate bearing capacity in clay is practically independent of the size ofthe plate. For tests in sandy soils 2, weet ay an = ten 11) where B, = width of the foundation By = width of the test plate In order to obtain the allowable bearing capacity of a foundation based on settlement considerations, the following equations apply. 319 Feld Load Test 197 Fora given intensity of load, ¢, Sp= 5, FE (Gor clayey sx es) (for sandy soi) 6.116) tp and Bp are meters, an be sated as BY (Bp +1)? s=sheh) Gee) oun In the preceding equation, B, and B, are in feet. Equations (3.116) and (3.117) are based on the works of Terzaghi and Peck (1967). Example 3.17 illustrates their application. 9) proposed a different technique for determining the load- bearing capacity of shallow foundations based on settlement consideration. Following are the steps of this procedure: 1. Let it be required to find the dimensions of a foundation that will carry a load of Q, with a tolerable settlement of Si. 2. Conduct two plate load tests with plates of diameters B, tnd By. 3. From the load-settlement curves obtained in Step 2, determine the total loads on the plates (Q, and Q,) that correspond to the settlement of For plate No, 1, the total load can be expressed as Q,=Aym4 Pin 118) Similarly, for plate No. 2 Q,=A,m+ Pin G.19) where 4,, A, = areas of the plates No. 1 and No. 2, respectively ‘Pi, Pz = perimeters ofthe plates No. 1 and No. 2, respectively ‘m, n= two constants that correspond to the bearing pressure and perimeter shear, respectively ‘The values of m and n can be determined by solving Eqs. (3.118) and Gly. 4. For the foundation to be designed. Q,= Am + Pn where A = area of the foundation P= perimeter of the foundation Because Q,, m, and n are known, Eq. (3.120) can be solved for determi nation of foundation width. The application of this procedure is given in Example 3.18, @.120)198 ‘Chapter 3 SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS. Example 3.17 “The results of plate load test in sandy cil are shown in Figure 3.48. The size of, the plate is 0.305 m x 0.305 m. Determine the size of a square column foundation that should carry a load of 2500 KN with « maximum settlement of 25 mm. Load/unit area (kN/) i 200 400800 Settlement (min) Buca ane rte| 70 Figure 248, Solution ‘The problem has tobe solved by a trial-and-ervor procedure, Use the following table and Eq, (3.116). Syoonsponding 5, foqimCol 3 Ba. 2386 3.1 m x 3.1 m willbe appropriate Example 3.18 ‘The results of two plate load tests are given in the following table. Plate diameter, B Teal ond, Seclement o cS) om) (0305 sea 2» 510 ns 2» 32 3.21 Toleabe Setemont of Bulsings 199 ‘A square column foundation ha to be constructed to cary a total load of 715 RNG ‘The tolerable settlement is 20 mmm. Determine the sizeof the foundation Solution © From the preceding two equations, m= 50.68 KN on? = 29.75 KNIm For the foundation tobe designed (Eq. (3:120)] Q.= Am + Pa Building Code, New York City Building Code) specify the allo capacity of foundations on various types of soil. For mino: ‘works, they often provide fairly acceptable guidelines, Hi bearing capacity values are primarily based on the visual near-surface soils. They generally do not take into conside: as the stress history of the soil, ground water table location, th foundation, and the tolerable settlement. So, for large construction projects, the codes’ presumptive values should be taken as a guide only. Tolerable Settlement of Buildings ‘As has been emphasized in this chapter, settlement analysis plays an impor- tant part in the design and construction of foundations. Large settlements of various components of a structure may lead to considerable damage andlor ‘may interfere with the proper ‘have been made to evaluate the. types of structure (for exampl 1963; Burland and Worth, 19745Chapte3 SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS Table 3.9 Limiting Angular Distonion As Recommended by Brum’ Safe liic for fexble brick wall, L/HT> SSE Uaioe tro any = r f [ f { 1 1 I t 1 I I | i ' ' 1 1921 Teloable Sotloment of Bulsings “The parameters areas follows: x= total vertical displacement at point y= diferent setdement between points i and j 4 = relative deflection o=tilt y= Ho = aga dicrion Sand and ‘ed ay ona 007 0.005 008 0.003 coos ao10 oon ont 0.005 005 2.0004 0010202 : (Chapter SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS ‘Table 311 Alowabie Average Setement fo Dillerent Building Typest Kind of building Building wih plain brick walle Ue 25 3 0) ysis 4 (aon Buiding with brick walls, reinforced with reaforced concrete eiafoced beck ‘ 50) ‘Framed bung 4 aon Sold reinforced concrete foundations of smokerck, sb, tomes, ‘nd 90 08 2 em) PROBLEMS: e lil ‘A continuoas foundation is 3 ft wide. Given: D,=3 fy = 110 IbIf, 6» 28°, and ¢ = 400 Tpit’, Using Tereaghis equation, determine the allowable gross vertical load-bearing capacity (actor of safety = 4). Assume that general shear failure occurs in thecal 3.2 Redo Problem 3.1 with the following: B= 1.5 m, Dy=1.2 m, 7=178 kNim?, § =35%, c= 0 factor of sfery = 3, 8.3 A squire columa is 3 m x 3 min plan. Given: D, = 2 m,7 = 165 KN], $ = 30", and ¢~0. Using Terzaghi’s equation, determine the gross allowable vertical load thatthe column could cary (actor of safery = 4), Assume that general shear failure cceurs inthe load of 1882 KN (Factor of sfery = 3) ha to be carried by square ‘m, y= 15.9 kNim, = 30", and ¢= 0, Use Terzaghi’s ofthe foundation, 35 Solve Problem 3.1 wing Ea. 36 Solve Problem 3.2 using Eq. 87 Solve Problem 3.3 using Ea. the fllowing are given: 0, @=35", D, =4 ft, D, =2 f, gros allowable 3 Quy = 144,000 Ib, Determine the size ofthe footing. 203 Figure P3.10 '/9c11 A column foundation is 8 fe x 4 fein plan. Given: Dy =3 ft, ¢=2500Ibjf?, ¢=0, and i. What isthe net ultimate load that the columa could carry? [Use loaded foundation is shown in Figure PA. Tae a frtor (of 4 and determine the maximum allowable load thatthe foundation could carry. Figure P3.14 3.15 An eccentrcally loaded foundation is shown in Figure P3.15, Determine the uli- ‘mate load, Q,, thatthe load could carry.204 Chapter SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS y=180TEN roma = apg title x= 1921? c= kN os Figure F316, 3.46 For a square foundation thet is x B in plan, the following are given: D, = 3 ft vertical gros allowable load, Qa = 150,000 Ib, 7 = 115 In|, @ = 40", €~ 0, and factor of fey = 3. Determine the sie of the foundation, 13.17 A square footing i shown in Figure P3.17. Using a factor of safety of 6, determine the size of the footing. 100,000 15 3k 7 azvater table ua = 120 Ib/t tH0 o= 90° Figure P37 1B KN/m?, § = 35°, c= 05 aso B= 1.5 my, L= 2m, ¢g= 03 m,= - problems 205 ‘9.19 Repeat Problem 3.18 with the following changes: ¢, = 0.4m, = 0.19 m. ‘3.20 Repeat Problem 3.18 with the following changes: ¢, = 0.6 m,¢, = 0.214 m. 3.21 Repeat Problem 3.18 with the following changes: e, = 0.286 m, ¢g = 0.214 m. 3.22 A continuous footing in a two-layered cay is shown in Figure P3.22. Find the gross Allowable bearing capacity. Factor of safety = 3 = 58S h/t Figure P3.22 [3.23 Find the gross ultimate load thatthe footing shown in Figure P3.23 can cary. Length, L = 122m y= IT29KN /mt = 32) N/a Figure P3.23 3.24 Refer ro Figure 320. The foundation is m x 2 m in plan. D,= 1 mand H= 1.5 1m. For the sand layer, = 35°, ¢= 0, y= 17.8 KN/m?; and forthe cy layer, ¢ = 0,206 ceptors SHALLOW Founnarions Hf ¢=60 N/m, = 18.2 Nim, Determine the gross allowable load that the founds Sion could cary. Use a factor of safer of 4 against bearing capacity fare. For ‘bearing capaiy factors shown in Eqs, (3.60) and (61), ute Table 3.2 | £38.25 Redo Problem 3.24 with the folowing Foundition: Bx L=3 x6 Dy= 25% Hash deposit. The net load per uni area Soil: p= 0.35 E,= 16500 KN/nt* = 165 Ria? ‘3.28 Solve Problem 3.26 wing Eq (3.69). Fo the correction factor, Cy use atime of 5 ,,_ yerforereep. 44.29 Solve Problem 3.27 using Eq. (3.69). For the corection factor, C5 use a time of 4 | 1 1 Figure P3.34 years for eep, Also use unit weight of si, = 10 Ib, 3.90 Refer to Figure P30, in which a square foundation is subjected ta loud and romest. Determine te setdement andthe rotation ofthe foundation. 3.35 Solve Problem 3.34 using Newnmash’'s chat SOKN | 4.36 Refer w Figure P334. Decermine the average increase of stress in the clay layer below che commer of the foundation. Use Newmask's char. Sten 3.37 Redo Problem 3.36 using Table 37. 3.38 Estimate the consolidation settlement of the clay layer shown in Figure P3.34 using the results of par (a) of Problem 3.34 13.39 Bstimate the consolidation setement ofthe clay lyer shown in Figure P3.34 using ‘the results of par (b) of Problem 3.34 3.40 Refer to Problem 2.4. What will be the net allowable bearing capacity of » founda- tion 5 ft x 5 ft in plan? Given: D,=3 ft; allowable setement = I ia. Use Ea. .109)203 208 " ] — Nn: (90) “A Pro Me ein ot ton 2 are eh Bla 3.41 Redo Problem 3.40 using Figure 345. 3.42 Two plate load tests with circular plates were conducted in the field. At 13 mm of ‘ertlement the results were a follows: Diameter of plate (mm) Load (eN) | | Sa eee eee eee ee Sere eee‘Chapter 3. SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS ‘American Society of Civil Engineers, Vol. 107, No. and Richar, FE. (1967). “Design Procedures for Dynamically ‘Loaded Foundations,” Journal of the Seil Mechanics ond Foundation Dio, ‘American Society of Civil Engineers, Vol 93, No. SM6, pp. 169-193. { {