Bearing Capacity & Settlement of Soil 8/19/1906

Bearing Capacity and Settlement of Soil

Bearing Capacity
Definitions
The Allowable Bearing Capacity is defined as the maximum pressure which
may be applied to the soil such that the two fundamental requirements are satisfied.

1) The factor of safety against shear failure of the supporting soil

must be adequate, a value between 2 or 3 normally being specified.
2) The settlement of the foundation should be tolerable and
particular, differential settlement should not cause any unacceptible damage nor
interfere with the function of the structure.

Ultimate Bearing Capacity is defined as the least pressure that will cause
complete shear failure of the soil in the vicinity of the foundation. Only aproximate
solution is available for Ultimate Bearing Capacity.

Three Type of Failure (Vesic, 1963, 1675)

for Dense or Stiff General Shear Failure
for Medium Density Local Shear Failure
for Loose or Soft Punching Shear

Requred Depth for Subsurface Exploration

It is essential that the soil conditions are known within the significant depth of any
foundation.
for square footing of width B 1.5 B
for strip footing of width B 3B

Lowe and Zaccheo, 1975 presents guidelnes :

For Large structure wth seperate closely spced footng: All borng should extend
to no less then 9 M (30 ft) belowest part of foundaton unless rock is encountered at
shallower depth.

For Isolated rigid foundatons: Extend to depth where vertical stress decreases
to 10 % of bearng pressure. All borng should extend to no less then 9 M (30 ft)
belowest part of foundaton unless rock is encountered at shallower depth.

AASHTO 1996 states:

When substructure units will be supported on deep foundation the depth of
subsurface exploration shall extend to a minimum of 6 M (20 ft) below the anticipated
pile or shaft tip elevation. Where pile or shaft groups will be used, the subsurface
exploration shall extend at least two times the maximum pile group dimension below
the anticipated tip elevation unless the foundation will be end bearing on or in rock.
For pile bearing on rock, a minimum of 3 M (10 ft) of rock core shall be obtained
at each exploration location to ensure the exploration has not been terminated on a
boulder.

by U Win Aung Cho 1

(19-8-06)
Bearing Capacity & Settlement of Soil 8/19/1906

Terzaghi's Theory of Bearing Capacity

Assumptions
1) Shear Strength between surface and footing depth D is neglected.
2) Soil above depth D is considered only as a surcharge imposing a
uniform pressure qo=γD on plane of footing
3) General Shear failure takes place and volume of soil remains
unchanged prior to failure
4) Footing base is rough that is no Active Rankine State can not be
developed under the footing. There exist only elastic wedge under footing having an
angle of φ
5) Strip footing of width B and semi infinite length L (i.e. B/L=0)

1. . . 1. Kpγ Kpc Kpq

qf γB tan ( φ ) . 1 c. tan ( φ ) q o.
2 2 2 2 2
cos ( φ ) cos ( φ ) cos ( φ )

1. . .
qf γ B ( Nγ ) c . ( Nc ) q o . ( Nq ) for B/L=0
2

Kpγ Passive Pressure Coefficients derived by φ Circle method

3 .π
φ . tan( φ )
e 2
Nq = Nc cot( φ ) . ( Nq 1)
2
φ
2 . cos 45 . deg
2

Local Shear Failure Terzaghi proposed modified parameters to be used

2. 2.
cl c φl atan tan ( φ )
3 3

for Square footing B/L=1

qf 0.4 . γ . B . Nγ 1.3 . c . Nc γ . D . Nq (B/L=1)

for Rectangular Footing (0 < B/L < 1)

Interpolate between above 2 equations or as follow
B . .
qf 0 4 . γ . B . Nγ 10 0 3. c Nc γ . D . Nq

by U Win Aung Cho 2

(19-8-06)
Bearing Capacity & Settlement of Soil 8/19/1906

qf 0.4 . γ . B . Nγ 1.0 0.3 . . c . Nc γ . D . Nq

L

Modifications

Meyerhof
Meyerhof varied wedge angle between φ and 45*deg+φ/2 to get minimum value
of Nγ.

Nγ ( Nq 1 ) . tan ( 1.4 . φ ) Nc cot( φ ) . ( Nq 1)

2
π . tan( φ ) . φ
Nq e tan 45 . deg
2
Meyerhof provide shape and depth factors
sc dc for Nc
sq dq for Nq
sγ dγ for Nγ

Hansen
Hansen include shape, depth and other factors

q c. N c. s c. d c. i c. g c. b c q. N q. s q. d q. i q. g q. b q 0.5 . γ e . B'. N γ . s γ . d γ . i γ . g γ . b γ

s stand for shape factor,

d for depth, i for inclination, g for ground (Base on slope) and b for Base
(tilted base) factor.

Bearing Capacity for Sand

Due to the extreme difficulty of obtaining undisturbed sand samples, the

allowable bearing capacity is normally estimated by means of correlations based
on the results of in-stu tests.

1) Plate Bearing Test

2) The Standard Penetration Test (ASTM D 1586-92 (1998))
3) The Dutch Cone Test (ASTM D 3441-94 (1998))

Standard Penetration Test (ASTM D 1586-92 (1998))

Di = 3.81 cm (1.5 in)

Do = 5.08 cm (2 in)
Free fall height 0.76 M (30 in)
Free fall weght 63.5 kg (140 lb)
Sampler is driven a total of 45 cm and numbers of below counts are recorded for
each 15 cm (6 in) intervals
Correction for SPT Values

There are many dfferent testng factors that can influence the accuracy of the SPT
readings.
Em = Hammer efficiency (for U.S. equipment 0.6 for safety hammer 0.45 for a
doughnut hammer

by U Win Aung Cho 3

(19-8-06)
Bearing Capacity & Settlement of Soil 8/19/1906

doughnut hammer
Cb = borehole diameter correction (1.0 for 65-115 mm, 1.05 for 150 mm,1.15 for
200 mm)
Cr = rod length correction (0.75 for upto 4 M of drll rod, 0.85 for 4 to 6 M, 0.95
for 6 to 10 M, 1.0 for drll rod n excess of 10 M)
N = measured SPT values
N60 = SPT N- value corrected for feld

N60 = 1.67 Em Cb Cr N

For the very fine sand and below the water table, if the measured N value greater
than 15, should be corrected as follow.
N'=15+1/2(N-15)

The Dutch Cone Test (ASTM D 3441-94 (1998))

Cone Penetration Test (CPT) gives cone resistance qc, force required to push cone
divided by horizontal-projection-area of cone (1000 mm^2).
The cone is pushed 80 mm into the sand at a uniform rate of 15-20 mm/s. The cone
penetration resistance usually being determined at depth intervals of 200 mm

qc qo
su
Nk

su = undrained shear stress

Nk = cone factor (a constant for that soil). Nk has been found to range from 5 to
75; however, most value are in the 10 to 30 range.

Relation between SPT and CPT

q c k . N 60
k = 0.1 to 1.0
0.1 to 0.2 for Silt, sandy silt
0.3-0.4 for Clean fine to medium sand
0.5 - 0.7 for Coarse sand and sand with little gravel
0.8 - 1.0 for Sandy gravels and gravel

The Buisman-DeBeer Method

This method in which the settlement under a given pressure is estimated using
qc and C a constant of compressibility of the sand
qc
C 1.5 .
σ' o

H . σ' o ∆σ
s ln
C σ' o
H
1. σ' o ∆σ
s ln dz
C σ' o
0
H = Thickness of Layer
' ff i b d

by U Win Aung Cho 4

(19-8-06)
Bearing Capacity & Settlement of Soil 8/19/1906

σ'o= effective overburden pressure

∆σ = increment of vertical stress at the centre of the layer
s = settlement

Plate Bearing Test

In this test the sand is loaded through a steel plate at least 300 mm square,
readings of load and settlement being observed up to failure or at least 1.5 times of
estimated allowable bearing pressure. The load increments should be one-fifth of
estimated allowable bearing pressure. The test plate is located at foundation level in a
pit at least 1.5 M square.
Be sure that sand layer is homogeneous and no weak layer within significant
depth.
Bearing Capacity for Deep Foundation
Piles or Shaft on Sand
q σ' o . N q
Db
q 40 . N . 400 . N kN/M^2
B
N = SPT value
Db = embeded length of pile
B = width of pile

Piles in Clay
q c u. N c
cu = undrained shear strength
Nc = 9 for D/B > 4

Ground Water Table

An adjustment to the ultimate bearing capacity is performed by adjusting the unit
weight of first term by using following equation (Myslivec and Kysela, 1978)

h' Df
γa γb . γ γb
B t
γa =adjusted unit weight to be used in first term
γb = buoyant unit weight of the soil (kN/M^3 or pcf)
γt = total unit weight
h' = depth of the ground water table below ground surface (M or ft)
Df = foundation depth from Ground surface
B = width of the footing

Moment and Eccentric Load

It is always desirable to design and construct shallow footing so that the vertical
load is applied at the centre of gravity of footing. There may be design situation
where the footing is subject to moment. This moment can be represented by a load P
that is offset a certain distance (eccentricity) from the center of gravity of the footing.
A usal requirement is that the load P must be located within the middle one-third of
footing.

Q.(B 6. e)
q

by U Win Aung Cho 5

(19-8-06)
Bearing Capacity & Settlement of Soil 8/19/1906

q max
B2
Q . ( B 6. e)
q min
2
B
Q = load applied to the footing (kN/M or kip/ft)
B = footing width
e = eccentricity
qmax, qmin = maximum and minimum bearing pressure
Earthquake Loading
It is common to use a larger allowable bearing capicity in the analysis. A common
recommendation is that the allowable bearing pressure can be increased by a factor of
1/3 for the earthquake analysis.

by U Win Aung Cho 6

(19-8-06)
Bearing Capacity & Settlement of Soil 8/19/1906

Example Calculation Bearing Capacity

Soil Parameters

5 0.1139 780 113.28 12 131.4

10 0.1139 780 112.3 15 131.27
D 15 . ft tanφ 0.1584 c 700 . psf γ 108.8 . pcf SPT 14 γ wet 129.21 . pcf
20 0.1584 700 101.69 15 125.5
25 0.1584 700 100.1 16 123.38

i 0 .. 4 180
φi atan tanφi . in degree
π

0.677 0.323
γi 0.671 0.329
Vsi
N . Vs = 0.65 Vui 1 Vsi Vu = 0.35
2.68 . 1000 . 9.807
m3 0.608 0.392
0.598 0.402

133.442

N 132.827
γ sat γi Vui . 9.807 . 1000 .
γ sat = 130.633 pcf
i m3
126.176
125.179

Foundation Parameters

Foundation Type = Iso

L' 12 . ft B' 12 . ft B B'

Di
ki in radian
B

SF 2.5

Water Tabel at Foundation Base

dw 4 . ft depth to water table under footing base

φi
Hi 0.5 . B . tan 45 . deg
2

dw . γ sat γ wet Average

γe ( 2. H dw) . γ .(H dw) 2
2 wet 2 effective unit
H H
weight of soil
by Hansen in wedge zone

by U Win Aung Cho 7

(19-8-06)
Bearing Capacity & Settlement of Soil 8/19/1906

2
π . tan φ i . deg φi B' .
Nq e . tan 45 . deg sq 1.0 sin φ i . deg
i 2 i L'

Nq
i . B'
Nc Nq 1 . cot φ i . deg sc 1.0
i i i N c L'
i
B'
Nγ Nq 1 . tan 1.4 . φ i . deg sγ Max 1.0 0.4 . , 0.6
i i i L'

2 . tan φ i . deg . ki . 1 sin φ i . deg

2
dq 1 iq 1 gq 1 bq 1
i

dc 1 0.4 . ki ic 1 gc 1 bc 1
i

gγ 1 bγ 1
dγ 1.0 iγ 1

qi γ wet . Di
i

q ult ci . N c . s c . d c . i c . g c . b c qi . N q . s q . d q . i q . g q . b q 0.5 . γ e . B'. N γ . s γ . d γ . i γ . g γ . b γ

i i i i i i i i i i

q ult
i
q all
i SF

4.218 1.687 5
5.444 2.177 10
Ton Ton
q ult = 7.71 q all = 3.084 D= 15 ft
9.367 ft2 3.747 ft2 20
11.154 4.461 25

by U Win Aung Cho 8

(19-8-06)
Bearing Capacity & Settlement of Soil 8/19/1906

Settlement of Soil
Settlement of cohesive and organic soils

Cohesive and organic soil can be susceptible to a large amount of settlement from
structure loads. The settlement of saturated clay or organic soil can have three different
components:
1) Immediate (initial)
2) Consolidation
3) Secondary compression
Immediate or Initial
Surface loading causes both vertical and horizontal strains which means that two-or
three-dimensional Loading.
Immediate settlement is a result of undrained shear deformation, or in other cases
contained plastic flow.
Method Based on the Theory of Elasticity
One approach is to use the undrained modulus Eu from triaxial compression tests in
order to obtained the immediate settlement.
2
1 µ
s i q. B . I p.
Eu
si = immediate settlement (M or ft)
q = applied uniform pressure (kPa or psf)
B = width of the foundation (M or ft)
Ip = dimensionless parameter derived from the theory of elasticity to account for the
thickness of the compressible layer, shape of the foundation, and flexibility of the
foundation
µ = poisson's ratio, normally assumed as 0.5 satuated plastic soil subjected to
undrained loading
Eu = undrained modulus of the clay (kPa or pcf)

Plate Load Test

The plate load test could significantly under estimate the immediate settlement if
the test is performed near surface of sandy layer or surface crust of clay that is
overconsolidated.
When large building is built, pressure bulb is larger and could result in significant
plastic flow if there is a normally consolidated clay layer under-lying the stiff surface
layer.

Stress Path Method

Immediate settlement is measured in laboratory using model of the field loading
conditions. An undistrubed soil specimen could be set up in the tri-axial appratus and
then the specimen could be subjected to vertical and horizontal stresses that are
equivalent to the anticipated loading condition.
Primary Consolidation
The increase in vertical will initially be carried by the pore water in the soil. This
increase in pore water pressure is known as excess pore water pressure ue. The excess
pore water pressure decrease with time, as water slowly flow out of the cohesive soil.
Slowly dissipation of the pore water pressure is known as primary consolidation.
On the basic of stress history, saturated cohesive soil may be underconsolidated,
normally consolidated or overconsolidated.

by U Win Aung Cho 9

(19-8-06)
Bearing Capacity & Settlement of Soil 8/19/1906

σ'p
OCR
σ'vo
OCR = Over Consolidation Ratio
σ'p = preconsolidation pressure
σ'vo = existing vertical effective stress

underconsolidated if (OCR < 1) pore water pressure ue exist in the soil

normally consolidated (OCR = 1) completely consolidated under the existing
overburden pressure
overconsolidated (OCR > 1) Vertical effective stress in the past is greater then that
of existing condition

Required Test for Estimation of Primary Consolidation

The Oedometer Test (ASTM D 2435-96, 1998)

Soil sample of with diameter 2.5 inch and thickness of 1 inch is laid within the
appratus, aplying vertical pressure to the laterally confined specimen, and then
submerging the specimen in distilled water. Vertical pressure is incrementally
increased with each pressure remaining on the specimen for a period of 24 hours. Dial
reading of the vertical deformation versus time are recorded for each vertical pressure.
Present a data on a semi-log graph which horizontal axis is effective vertical
pressure σ'vc and vertical axis is vertical strain εv. Vertical axis could also be in the
void ratio e.
From this one can estimate σ'p using Casagrande construction technique (1936). as
described bellow.
1) Locate the point of minimum radius on curve
2) Draw a line tangent to point A
3) Draw a horizontal line through point A
4) Biset the angle of step 2 and 3
5) Extend the straight line portion to meet biseting line.
The point of interseting line is (point B) the maximum past pressure
(preconsolidation pressure)
Curved can be approximated as two straight lines, Recompression curved (flat) and
Virgin Consolidation Curve (steep).
Slope of Recompression curve is recompresion index Cr and Slope of Consolidation
curve is compression index Cc. Using Cr and Cc, ∆e can be calculated.
Amount of Primary Consolidation Settlement
∆e
Cc for precompression curve
log σ' vc2 log σ' vc1
∆e
Cr for consolidation curve
log σ' vc2 log σ' vc1

for OCR < 1

Ho . σ' vo ∆σ' v ∆σ v
s c Cc . log
1 eo σ' vo
for OCR = 1
Ho . σ' vo ∆σ v
s c Cc . log
1 eo σ' vo

by U Win Aung Cho 10

(19-8-06)
Bearing Capacity & Settlement of Soil 8/19/1906

for OCR > 1

case I : σ' vo ∆σ v σ'vm

Ho . σ' vo ∆σ v
s c Cr . log
1 eo σ' vo
case II : σ' vo ∆σ v > σ'vm

Ho . σ' vm Ho . σ' vo ∆σ v
s c Cr . log Cc . log
1 eo σ' vo 1 eo σ' vm

sc = settlement due to primary consolidation

Ho = initial thickness of the clay layer
eo = initial void ratio of saturated clay
σ'vo = initial effective vertical stress of clay
∆σ'v = for an underconsolidated soil, this represent the increse in vertical effective
stress that will occurs as the cohesive soil consolidates under its own weigh
∆σv = increase in load, typically due to construction
σ'vm = maximum pass pressure

Secondary Compression

After primary consolidation (pore water pressure has dissipated), secondary

compression settlement is atarted.
s s C a . Ho. ∆ . log ( t )
ss = Secondary Compression settlement
Ca = secondary compression ratio
Ho = initial thickness of the layer
∆*log(t) = change in log of time from the end of primary cnsolidation to the
end of the design life of the structure

by U Win Aung Cho 11

(19-8-06)
Bearing Capacity & Settlement of Soil 8/19/1906

Fopundation Settlement (IMMEDIATE) of Mat Foundation

Steinbrenner Influence Factors

1. 1 M2 1 . M2 N2 M M2 1 . 1 N2
I 1( M , N ) M . ln ln
π
M. 1 M2 N2 1 M M2 N2 1

N . M
I 2( M , N ) atan
2. π
N . M2 N2 1

Foundation Properties

L 129.6 . ft B 129 . ft Foundation Size

B
L' L B'
2
D 7 . ft Foundation Depth

D L
= 0.054 = 1.005 IF 0.85 Figure 5-7
B B

H 3. B

L' H
M N
B' B'

Ry
Ry 38461.802 . 103 . lbf qo Average Foundation Contact
B.L
Pressure under Foundation (From
Base Reaction under service
Soil Properties condition)

µ 0.5 Satuated Clay Table 2-7

40 . 106 . Pa
3
Es Es = 5.802 10 psi Medium Dense Clay Table 2-8

SPT 15 Penetration Blow Count/ft

Immediate Settlement
2. µ .
2
1 µ 1
∆H qo . B'. . I (M, N)
1 I 2( M , N ) . I F
Es 1 µ

∆H = 0.765 in

by U Win Aung Cho 12

(19-8-06)
Bearing Capacity & Settlement of Soil 8/19/1906

References

1. SEISMIC DESIGN OF BUILDING STRUCTURES by Michael R. Lindeburg,

PE. and Majid Baradar , PE. 2001
2. STRUCTURAL CONCRETE, Theory and Design. by M. Nadim Hassoun 1998

3. GEOTECHNICAL AND FOUNDATION ENGINEERING by Robert W. Day 1999

4. FOUNDATION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN, BY Joseph E. Bowels, P.E.,

S.E., Fifth Edition. 1996
5. SOIL MECHANICS by Robert F. Craig 1977

by U Win Aung Cho 13

(19-8-06)