Module-1.

4/Lesson-2
Chapter – 1, Part 1.4

SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS
Analysis and Design

Contents
Module-1.4/Lesson-2 .............................................................................................................. 1
Chapter – 1, Part 1.4 .......................................................................................................... 1
1.4. Modeling Soil Structure Interactions for Rational
Design of Foundations ....................................................................................2
1.4.1. Soil Reaction: – Contact Pressure, Soils and Soil Models .............................................2
1.4.1.1. Introduction ..................................................................................................................2
1.4.1.2. Contact Pressures by the Theory of Subgrade Reaction ............................3
Winkler’s Foundation Model .................................................... 4
Soil–Structure Interaction Equation using Winkler Model ...... 9

[Addiszemen T. PhD] Module-14/Lesson-1 Page | 1

1.4.1. Soil Reaction: – Contact Pressure, Soils and Soil Models

Analysis of structures and structural elements, supported on soil, requires the

knowledge of the properties of the structure, as well as the properties of the soil.

While properties of structural materials of the foundation and superstructure are

usually well known, obtaining the soil’s properties and, especially, evaluating the
soil’s behavior under applied loads, is very difficult.

Various soils react differently to applied loads and, like any bearing material,
produce under the same loads different settlements and different stresses. A wide
variety of soil and its properties as well as various complex soil conditions require
soil investigation and testing in each case.

Analysis of Beams, Plates, Walls, Frames, and other structures supported on

elastic foundations is usually performed by ; in other words,
by replacing the soil with material that behaves under applied loads like the given
real soil.

This helps to solve the final form of soil–structure interaction Equations (4.1)
and (4.4), the soil reaction below

q  x,y   σ  x,y   ?
has to be incorporated in those equations which are dependent on the Beam/ Plate
and Soil Characteristics and the bond at the interface.

Assuming frictionless contact, and complete bond at the interface between the
beam/plate and the soil, q(x) can be expressed in terms of soil displacements
(mainly vertical displacement for vertical loads) using Different Foundation
Models.

A review of these models are given in references by Reissner (1937), Kameswara

Rao (1969, 1971) and others and will be discussed latter.

The most popular used by practicing engineers are:

Winkler’s Soil Model or Winkler Foundation proposed by Winkler (1867) and later
used by many scientists like Hetenyi (1946), Umansky (1933), and others;

[Addiszemen T. PhD] Module-14/Lesson-1 Page | 2

Elastic Half-Space or Elastic Continuum Model proposed by Wieghardt (1922), Shechter
(1939), Gorbunov-Posadov (1941, 1949), Harr (1966); and

Elastic Layer Model, developed by Shechter (1948), Giroud (1968, 1972), and
Poulos (1967).

Some scientists trying to improve the Soil Models mentioned above recommend
the use of .

For Example, Pasternak (1954) proposed a Soil Model with two coefficients of
subgrade reaction, and Reissner (1958) recommended a soil model that
simplified analysis of foundations supported on Elastic Half-Space.

A detailed review and description of Various Soil Models will be discussed

later.

Methods of analysis described in this course are developed and presented only for
Three Soil Models:

a) Theory of Subgrade Reaction: - Winkler Foundation Model

b) The Theory of Elasticity: - Elastic Half-Space, and
c) Elastic Layer

The theory of elasticity, which treats both the foundation and the soil as elastic
continua, (Continuous Elastic Materials), provides the most rigorous approach
to the solution of interaction problems.

However, the same is extremely complex – more so if one attempts closed-

form theoretical solutions – for the solution of practical problems met with
in foundation engineering practice.

This provided the necessary impetus for developing simplified theories to meet
the requirements of ordinary problems of analysis and design. The theory of
subgrade reaction constitutes such a simplified approach for the determination of
contact pressures below foundations interacting with soil. But the reader may be
warned early that even this theory is sufficiently complex for all but simple
problems of analysis and design.

In the term Subgrade Reaction “Subgrade‟ is the soil beneath the foundation and
“reaction” means the soil reaction on the foundation. Hence subgrade reaction
simply means Contact Pressure.

The “Theory of Subgrade Reaction‟ was originally due to E. Winkler and was
introduced in 1867. The whole theory is built on the simplifying assumption that
contact pressures are directly proportional to the deflection of the elastic system.

[Addiszemen T. PhD] Module-14/Lesson-1 Page | 3

Winkler foundation is based on the following relationship between the Pressure
applied to the Soil and the Soil Settlement. Thus, if we denote contact pressure
by p, and the elastic deflection of the system by w, it simply means:

p  k w 4B.1

Equation 4b.1 is the basic equation for analysis of structures supported on

Winkler foundation.

In this equation w is the settlement of the soil, usually in centimeters or in mm, p

is the load applied to one square unit of the soil area, usually in in kN / m 2 , and
k is the Modulus of Subgrade Reaction which is the constant of proportionality
between p and w.

The above relationship shows that if w of an elastic system is known, p follows

(Figure 4b.1) provided the value of the constant of proportionality k is known.
(Actually, since p is a constant times w, the w diagram itself represents p, but to a
different scale.) But then, the elastic deflection w of an elastic system is known
only if p, the contact pressure also is known, as w depends on both the loading
and reaction.

Thus a mutually dependent or interactive situation develops which renders the

determination of contact pressures no more a simple direct exercise for anything
but some simple “Rigid‟ Problems.

The Modulus of Subgrade Reaction represents a load that, being applied to one
square unit of the soil surface, produces a settlement equal to one unit, and is the
only parameter needed to obtain the settlement of the soil.

Winkler Foundation is based on the following three assumptions:

a) The load applied to the soil surface produces settlements of the soil only under
the applied load and does not produce any settlements and stresses outside of
the loaded area.
b) The soil can resist compression as well as tension stresses.
c) The shape and size of the foundation do not affect the settlement of the soil.

These assumptions are not always accurate because it is well known that, in many
cases, a load applied to the soil produces settlements not only under the applied
load, but also outside the loaded area. It is also well known that soil does not
resist any, even small, tension stresses. And finally, the settlement of the soil
depends not only on the type of soil but also on the shape and size of the
foundation.

[Addiszemen T. PhD] Module-14/Lesson-1 Page | 4

Figure 4b.1. Assumptions in soil structure interaction Winkler Model

However, numerous experimental and theoretical investigations as shown by

many scientists, for example, Klepikov (1967), proved that analysis based on
Winkler foundation produces realistic results that are practically close enough to
results obtained from soil testing and observations of settlements of real
structures.

Regarding the assumptions mentioned above, it is important to note that most of

the foundation settlements are produced by loads applied directly to the loaded
areas, especially for SOFT SOILS.

Loads applied to the soil outside of the loaded area may affect these settlements
only for soils such as HARD CLAY, limestone, rock, and other similar soils that,
to a certain degree, follow the rules of the theory of elasticity.

Tension Stresses between the soil and foundation occur in some cases, not only
when Winkler’s Soil Model is used. They occur regardless of what kind of soil
model is used. In addition, it is important to remember that in most of the cases,
the weight of the structure is very high and tension stresses practically do not take
place.

Thus in place of two elastic constants E and  in theory of elasticity, we have the
single elastic constant k in the theory of subgrade reaction. But notwithstanding
the fact that both E and k are elastic constants, there is a basic difference
between the two which needs to be clearly recognized.

Thus, while E is purely a material constant, k depends not only on the material
(i.e., the soil) but also upon the dimensions of the foundation in contact with the
soil. The latter makes for an extra dimension of complexity in the use of the
theory of subgrade reaction for foundations interacting with soils.

[Addiszemen T. PhD] Module-14/Lesson-1 Page | 5

The theory assumes that the p. w relationship is LINEAR (Figure 4b.2) so that k,
which is the constant of proportionality, is the same for all values of p.

It also assumes that k has the same value for all points of contact between the
foundation and the soil.

These assumptions (which are no longer necessary in the numerical treatment of a

problem, especially by the Finite Element Method), are collectively referred to as
“Winkler’s Hypothesis” and the model of the soil that satisfies the
WINKLER‟S HYPOTHESIS is called the ‘Winkler Model’ for the soil.

Figure 4b.2. Linear assumption in k = p/w relation in Winkler Model

The physical picture of the soil emerging from the Winkler Model is a medium
consisting of an infinite number of Linear, Elastic, Identical, but independent
springs.

In examining such a model, we see that the Perfect Elasticity of the spring
ensures the linearity between p and w, and the fact that the springs are identical
indicates that the springs have the same spring constant.

However, the assumption with the most far-reaching significance is the one
pertaining to the independence of the springs. A system of independent springs
means that each spring can deflect independent of the adjacent springs, due to the
load acting directly on it alone Figure 4b.3a). This implies that the soil has been
assumed as a Discrete or Elastically Discontinuous Medium.

While this may be more true of a medium like sand, a material like stiff clay
behaves like an elastic continuum, where shear interaction takes place in the soil
in the vertical direction, which makes the final deflected profile more continuous
(Figure 4b.3b) and not abrupt as depicted by Figure 4b.3a.

It is obvious that a system of interconnected springs (see Figure 4b.4a) can

represent this situation, which independent springs cannot. It should, however, be
clearly appreciated that the above limitation with regard to continuity applies

[Addiszemen T. PhD] Module-14/Lesson-1 Page | 6

only to soil, and that there is no such assumption involved on the part of the
structure (i.e., the foundation) which has been accepted as an Elastic Continuum
in its own right (represented by its elastic constants E and  ), because of which
the deflected profile of a beam, even when the loads and reactions are
concentrated, is smooth (Figure 4b.4a).

Deformation of Actual Foundation.

[Addiszemen T. PhD] Module-14/Lesson-1 Page | 7

Figure 4b.3. Assumption of Independent Springs /Load on Winkler’s foundation.

Therefore, when such a beam is loaded on soil (Figure 4b.4b) the deflected
profile will assume a smooth shape even under the assumption of independent
springs.

Notwithstanding the above limitation, it is certain that, between the structure and
the soil, the latter is less continuous or more discrete than the former, and to this
extent we are certainly on safer ground with regard to our assumption.

On the other hand, if we were to account for the continuity of the soil medium
also, much of the simplicity which the theory of subgrade reaction allows for
would have been lost, and one would much rather revert to the theory of elasticity
approach which treats the soil also as a continuous elastic medium.

Figure 4b.4. Assumption of Independent Springs in Winkler’s model.

[Addiszemen T. PhD] Module-14/Lesson-1 Page | 8

However, between the limits of these two approaches, attempts have been made
at successive stages to suggest modifications on the Winkler Model, many of
which offer only little refinement of the result when compared to the
mathematical involvement of the model concerned.

Winkler’s Model is the simplest both in terms of representation of the soil

reaction at the footing soil interface as well as analysis of the resulting soil–
structure interaction Equations, though it has inherent deficiencies as outlined. It
has an added advantage that the soil parameter used for expressing the soil
reaction, that is, k (Equation (4b.1)), referred to as spring constant (of the
idealized springs of the Winkler’s model as shown in Figure 4b.3) is relatively
easy to evaluate from laboratory and field experiments.

Thus Winkler’s model is used for most of the rational analysis and design
presented in this course. Thus using WINKLER’S MODEL for representing the
soil and using Equation (4.24) for soil reaction the soil–structure interaction
equation can be expressed as follows:

Soil–Structure Interaction Equation for Beams on Elastic Foundations

E
I

k
w
(
x
)
p
(
x
)
d
w d
(
x
)

4 4B.2
x

4
 
The assumption p = kw(x) implies the statement that the supporting medium is
elastic; in other words, that it’s material follows Hooke's law.

Its elasticity, therefore, can be characterized by the force which, distributed over a
unit area, will cause a deflection equal to unity. This constant of the supporting
medium, k o [kN/m3], is called the modulus of the foundation. Assume that the
beam under consideration has a uniform cross section and that b is its constant
width, which is supported on the foundation. A unit deflection of this beam will
cause reaction bk o in the foundation; consequently, at a point where the deflection
is y the intensity of distributed reaction (per unit length of the beam) will be:

p  bk ow (x )  kw (x )

Soil–Structure Interaction Equation for Plates on Elastic Foundation

D4w(x,y)  kw(x,y)  p(x) 4B.3

Where: k = spring or the soil constant, to be evaluated from suitable laboratory
and field tests.

///////////////////

[Addiszemen T. PhD] Module-14/Lesson-1 Page | 9