12 | V a r i o u s T y p e s o f S o i l M o d e l s

3. Various types of soil models

3.1 Winkler’s Spring Model

It is well known that deformability of soil under stress can be modelled by springs knowing
the subgrade modulus of soil.

Fig 3.1 Soil as springs

Calculation of the stiffness of the vertical springs to be used in the model

The rigidity of the springs can be calculated by subgrade modulus or the modulus of
elasticity of the soil.

 From the Young’s modulus

As we know that,

Stress〆strain
Or, ⌈ ⌉

Where, = stress

= Young’s modulus of elasticity

= strain

If we consider a cubical element of the soil and multiply by the area of any of the face with
the stress over that face we will get the force over that face. Therefore, multiplying the
above equation by area A,

⌈ ⌉

Or, F=AE
13 | V a r i o u s T y p e s o f S o i l M o d e l s

Or, F= (AE).(∂L/L)

Or, F= (AE/L). ∂L

Therefore, (AE/L) can be considered as the equivalent spring constant of that element of the soil
but due to heterogeneous nature of the soil, this constant can vary from element to element. So
care should be taken while using the constant value in our model.

 From the subgrade modulus of the soil

Subgrade of the soil multiplied by the tributary area will give the stiffness of the springs.

Suppose we have to insert one spring in the

centre of the plate which has been divided
into four parts. The spring constant will be
A1 A2 obtained from the contribution from the all
four parts of the plate i.e.

Spring constant=
A3 A4
Subgrade of the soil * (¼)(A1+A2+A3+A4)
Fig 3.2

*The springs used here are uncoupled which means that each spring in independent of the
movement of the other spring which is not the case in reality because the movement of any soil
grain is not independent of the other soil grain in its vicinity. So, we need to make some
modification in the values of the spring constant to couple them and to do so, softer springs
should be provided in the interiors of the plate and the stiffness of the springs should increase as
we move outwards. To do so, some of the structural engineers provide double springs near the
edge of the plate. But, in this case it has been assumed that stiffness of the springs are constant
throughout to take into account some coupling effect (reference, FOUNDATION ANALYSIS
AND DESIGN; J.E. BOWLES).
14 | V a r i o u s T y p e s o f S o i l M o d e l s

Example 1

Using STAAD.pro one individual footing has been modelled as a plate and has been divided
into 72 elements. The subgrade modulus used for the soil is 4000 kN/ .

Fig 3.3 Spring modelling in STAAD.pro

Springs are provide in 3 zones i.e. springs on the interior of the plate, springs on the corners
of the plate and the springs on the edge of the plate other than corner springs.

Spring constants:

For Interior Springs:

Area of one plate element= (4/9)*(4.85/8) m2

= 0.269444 m2

From the figure, it is clear that for interior springs (for example spring
number 1), each plate on the 4 side of the node will contribute 1/4th of
their area.

Thus,

Stiffness of interior spring = 4*(1/4)*(Area of one plate element)*(Subgrade modulus)

=4*(1/4)*(0.269444)*(4000) kN/m
=1077.77 kN/m
15 | V a r i o u s T y p e s o f S o i l M o d e l s

For Corner Springs:

As it is evident from the above figure that for the spring number 3, only one plate element is
contributing 1/4th of its area.

Thus,

Stiffness = (¼)*(area of one plate element)*(subgrade modulus)

= (1/4)*(0.269444)*(4000) kN/m

=269.44 KN/m

For Edge Springs:

It can be seen that for the springs at the edge (other than at corner) only two of the plate
elements contribute 1/4th of their area.

Thus,

Stiffness = 2*(¼)*(area of one plate element)*(subgrade modulus)

= 2*(1/4)*(0.269444)*(4000) kN/m

= 538.88 kN/m

Individual Footing

Thickness of the footing has been assumed to be 1.15m. The dimensions of the footing are
4m X 4.85m and a load of 7952.667 kN has been applied and the results are as shown in the
diagrams. Springs of constant stiffness have been used to take coupling effect of the soil into
account.

Fig 3.4 Bending moment in the plates along the two axes
16 | V a r i o u s T y p e s o f S o i l M o d e l s

It can be noted that the maximum magnitude of the bending moment in the plate is 1209
kN/m.

Example 2

Two Individual Footing Connected By A Raft

Two footings of same properties, loading and dimensions have been now combined by a raft
of thickness 500 mm and then analysed. Same stiffness values have been used as the area of
each plate has been kept same as in case of example 1. The length of the raft is taken equal to
2 m.The results obtained have been shown in the diagram below:

Fig 3.5 Bending moment Mx in case of combined footing

Fig3.6 Bending moment My in case of combined footing

17 | V a r i o u s T y p e s o f S o i l M o d e l s

It is observed that the magnitude of maximum bending moment in case of the combined
footing is 1215 kN/m which is slightly greater in magnitude than that obtained in case of the
individual footings. In one of the direction i.e. Mx in this case; the bending moment reduces
but in other direction there is no significant change in the magnitude of bending moment.