220 FOUNDATION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN ‘The Terzaghi Bearing-Capacity Equation One of the early sets of bearing-capacity equations was proposed by Terzaghi (1943) « shown in Table 4-1, These equations are similar to Eg. (&) derived in the previous sect but Terzaghi used shape factors noted when the limitations of the equation were discussed Terzaghi’s equations were produced from a slightly modified bearing-capacity theory devel TABLE 4-1 Bearing-capacity equations by the several authors indicated ‘erzaghi (1943), See Table 42 for typical values and for Ky vals @ t= Net ING + OSYBNyy Ny m Seles an ftevie Ne= (Wy = Noor = M8 Ee 1) For: strip round square gal0 13 13 | = 10 06 08 ‘Meyethot (1963).* See Table 4-3 for shape, dept, and inclination factors. Vertical load: guy = ENS + Met + OSYBN GS 2 Inclined load: gua = eNedle + BNylly + 058% dy ay emis 2) Yas Dua (49 Hen (970) Bx Tite 45 fr ae, deh a o cs Grate = Macs. + sdb OSA Mts ao eae Ms(l +s, +d, m— Dy Ny = same as Meyerhof above 1. = same as Meyerhof above My = 150M, ~ Dtang ‘Vest (1973, 1975). See Table 45 for shape, depth, and oer factors, ‘Use Hansen's equations above, 1, = same as Meyerhot above N= same as Meyerhot above My = 20+ Dang "These mets requ al proces 1 obtain design ase dimensions snc with Band length ar needed compute saps, doth and infaence fat. 808 Se 46 when =BEARING CAPACITY OF FOUNDATIONS 221 Temps ta fact oe taht Fortin, Moot c= t+ tag iss log spiral for @ > 0 vine © igure4-3._ (a) Shallow foundation with rough base defined. Tezaghi and Hansen equation of Table 4-1 neglest ‘shear along cd; (6) general focting-soi interaction for bearng-capacty equations for strip footing—ef side for "Terzaghi (1943), Hansen (1970), and right side Meyerhof (1951), Tereaghi: = ‘oped by Prandtl (ca. 1920) from using the theory of plasticity to analyze the punching of 1 rigid base into a softer (soil) material. Similar to Eq. (k), the basic equation was for the ‘case in which a unit width from a long strip produced a plane strain case, all shape factors 5; = 1.00, but the 1; factors were computed differently. Terzaghi used a = ¢ in Figs. 4-2 and 4-3 whereas most other theories use the a = 45 + 2 shown, We see in Table 4-1 that ‘Terzaghi only used shape factors with the cohesion (s.) and base (s,) terms. The Terzaghi bbearing-capacity equation is developed, as was Eq. (4), by summing vertical forces on the wedge bac of Fig, 4-3. The difference in N factors results from the assumption of the log spiral arc ad and exit wedge cde of Fig 4-3. This makes a very substantial difference in how Pp is computed, which in turn gives the different N; values. The shear slip lines shown on Fig. 4-3 qualitatively illustrate stress trajectories in the plastic zone beneath the footing as the ultimate bearing pressure is developed. ‘Terzaghi’s bearing-capacity equations were intended for “shallow” foundations where DsBPr renner 222, FOUNDATION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN TABLE G2 TABLE 43 Bearing-capacity factors for the Shape, depth, and inclination factors for Terzaghi equations the Meyerhof bearing-capacity equations Values of for dof 0, 34, and 48 are orignal of Table 4-1 “Terzghivales and used to back: compute Rep — —e iets hy Faas oberg eee eee emcee osm 19 oo os ee seit ost tina i 96 oa oe ag id 3% 294428 ta oro m m7 4 50 380 é stn? agg Dee Re tvoales dare 0 72 ms 7 $0 Mo 663380 = 1401VR 5 ¢>10 3 RA m0 ya dy= o 4 957 3m a 45 13132513 2880 —_oeinaton Any 4% 283279 TAOL RY so 31s 45111532 ammo | si ist gt y >o Shy = Se +1 fee Teg 909 127] © : : 0 Where Ky ~ wats + 4a 1 ~ angle of restntR mensared fom vera witha Sign if = Gall = 10 5.1.0 = previously defined so that the shear resistance along cd of Fig. 4-3a could be neglected. Tuble 4-1 lists the ‘Terzaghi equation and the method for computing the several Nj factors and the two shape factors s;. Table 4-2 is a short table of JV factors produced from a computer program and ‘edited for illustration and for rapid use by the reader. Terzaghi never explained very well how he obtained the Kp used to compute the bearing-capacity factor Ny. He did, however, give a small-scale curve of versus N, and three specific values of Ny at g = 0, 34, and 48° as shown on Table 4-2. The author took additional points from this curve and used computer to back-compute Kpy to obtain a table of best-fit values from which the tabulated values of N shown in Table 4-2 could be computed from the equation for N,, shown in Table 4-1, Inspection of Table 4-4 indicates that the Meyerhof Nga Values are fairly close except for angles of ¢ > 40°. Other approximations for , include the following: Ny = 20g + Drang ‘Vesié (1973) Ny = L1(Ng~Dtanl.3h Spangler and Handy (1982) ‘The Ny value has the widest suggested range of values of any of the bearing-capacity factors. A literature search reveals 38<.N,< 192 ford = 40° In this textbook values from Tables 4-2 and 4-4 give a range from about 79 to 109, Recently Kumbhojkar (1993) presented a series of values of N, with the claim they are better representations of the Terzaghi values than those of Table 4-2. Am inspection of theseBEARING CAPACITY OF FOUNDATIONS 223, Ny values shows the following: ‘Terzaghi” olton and Lau Kumbhojkar Table 4-2 css) (1993) (1993) (this text 336 a5 2 36 43780 638 650.7 7801 See Terai (1945), lg. 38 ad page 28 Fortunately the Ny term does not make a significant contribution to the computed bearing capacity, s0 any of the values from Tables 4-2 or 4-4 can be used (or perhaps an average). Bolton and Lau (1993) produced new N, and N, values for strip and circular footings for both smooth and rough ground interfacings. Their N, values for either smooth or rough strips ae litle different from the Hansen values for rough strips. The N, values for circular footings range to more than two times the strip values. The Ny values for rough footings ‘compare well with the Vesié values in Table 4-4. Since the Table 4-4 values have shape 5 and depth d; factors to be applied, it appears that these “new” values offer little advantage and are certainly more difficult to compute (see comparison with Terzaghi values in preceding table). Meyerhof’s Bearing-Capacity Equation Meyethof (1951, 1963) proposed a bearing-capacity equation similar to that of Terzaghi but included a shape factor withthe depth term Nj. He also included depth factors d; and ‘TABLE 44 Bearing-capacity factors for the Meyerhof, Hansen, and Vesié bearing- ‘capacity equations Note that Nand Ny are the same forall ee meods sbvcrps identi thr for Ny oO Nam Man My MYND —sin dP ° smu 10 00 00 00 oes 0.000 S te 16 Of gk a 145 88k ka out sr 382058 294 2 BH ff 3 29 SA tan oasis 25 wil = 17 BBO o3it % mas 1879 80s 0308, % 870479267 0299 303013 RA SL 57 610 0289 3547-32 B20 3020653 ozs Moo dT SL 108 082 3% $0ss 70a 562 OTH os 38 GL3L a9 S61 KO. 779 O97 023 407525 Al 84935 1083S oi 41737 mS a3 LOT oir 50 266503185 S674 8777613195 oust oe Daslimitwben 8 C. Sight ferences in above ble can be obized using popran BEARINO.EX 0 thet depenting om com ter ned and wher cr ott has oig poi224, FOUNDATION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN soctnaton factors i (both noted in discussion of Bq, ()] for cases where te foting Joa 8 ‘neti om the vertical. These additions produce equations of the general form shown © incline Teh elect NV factors computed in Table 4-4, Program BEARING is provided on disk for other N; values. ‘Meyerhof obtained his N factors by making tials of the zone abd’ wit arcad' of Fig. 4.30, anih include an approximation for shear along line ed of Fig 43a. The shapes depth, ae ei on factors in Table 4-3 ae from Meyerhof (1963) and are somewhat differed and inctighl values, The shape factors do not greatly differ from those given by Tesh, peept forthe addition of 3. Observing thatthe shear effect along line eof Fis 43a was sill being somewhat ignored, Meyerhof proposed depth factors di He a proposed using the inclination factors of Table 4-3 to reduce the beating eaPott when she lu resultant was inlined from the vertical by the angle @. When the fy factor sane ft should be self-evident that it does not apply when & = 0°, since a base iP ‘would ae i eis tem_-even if there is base cohesion forthe ic tem ls, the factors all = 1.0 if the angle 9 = 0. ‘Up toa deph of D ~ B in Fig, 434, the Meyerhof gu isnot grey different ‘rom the -Teraeghi value. The difference becomes more pronounced at larger D/B ratios. Hansen’s Bearing-Capacity Method Hansen (1970) proposed the gencralbearing-capacity case and N factor equations shoyn saree U1. This equation is readily seen to be a further extension ofthe ealies Mcvet ie c1951) work, Hansen's shape, depth, and other factors making up the genera) bearing: apacity equation are given in Table 4-5,"These represent revisions and extensions from eat Fanproposals in 1957 and 1961. The extensions include base factors for siwatens in which te, Prokop i tte from the horizontal by and fr the possibility of a slope 6 of Te ‘ground sporting the footing to give ground factors g. Table 4-4 gives elected N voles forthe sree eaations together with computation ads forthe more dificult shape an’ dpi face rane aCe pram BEARING for intermediate N factors, because interpolation is no recommended, especially for g = 35°. ‘Any ofthe equations givenin Table 4-5 notsubscripted witha V may be used a appr rioe intcions and restrictions are noted in the table). The equations shown inthis table for Snelination factors i; will be considered in additional detail in Sec. 4-6, Tras when the base i tilted, Vand H are perpendicular and parallel, respectively (© the base, compared with when iti horizontal as shown inthe sketch with Table 45 eee Going on a slope both the Hansen and Vesié gy factors can be used 10 reds increase, depending on the direction of H;) the bearing capacity using N factors 85 BY irae cection 49 considers an alterative method for obtaining the bearing capacity of footings on a slope. Tee tmecn equation implicitly allows any D/B and thus can be used for both shallow (footings) and deep (piles, drilled caissons) bass. Inspection ofthe 2Ng (xm SUBGESS * eet Increase in gui with great depth. To pace modest Limits on this, Hansen used D d= 14047 5 D a 1 1+ 2tan gl — sindLEAKING CAPACITY OF ROUNDATIONS 225 4D d, = 1+ O0.4tan’ B 1+ 2tand — sing? tan? 2 ‘These expressions give a discontinuity at D/B = 1; however, note the use of = and >. For = O (giving d2) we have D Pay i‘ B De= 0 1 is 2 5 10 2 100 = 0 040 042 044 055059061062 Actually computes 039 We can see that use of tan” D/B for D/B > 1 controls the increase in d= and dy that are in line with observations that gan appears to approach a limiting value at some depth ratio D/B, where this value of D is often termed the critical depth. This limitation on gg Will be further considered in Chap. 16 on piles Vesié’s Bearing-Capacity Equations ‘The Vesié (1973, 19756) procedure is essentially the same as the method of Hansen (1961) with select changes. The NV. and Ng terms are those of Hansen but N, is slightly different (Gee Table 4-4). There are also differences in the ii, bj, and g; terms as in Table 4-5c. The ‘Vesié equation is somewhat casicr to use than Hansen’s because Hansen uses the i terms in computing shape factors s; whereas Vesié does not (refer to Examples 4-6 and 4-7 following). Which Equations to Use ‘There are few full-scale footing tests reported in the literature (where one usually goes to find substantiating data). The reason is that, as previously noted, they are very expensive to do and the cost is difficult to justify except as pure research (using a government grant) or for a precise determination for an important project—usually on the basis of settlement control. Few clients are willing to underwrite the costs of a full-scale footing load test when. the bearing capacity can be obtained—often using empirical SPT or CPT data directly—to a sufficient precision for most projects. ‘Table 4-6 is a summary of eight load tests where the footings are somewhat larger than ‘models and the soil data are determined as accurately as possible. The soil parameters and {as (in kgfem?) are from Milovié (1965). The several methods used in this text [and the Balla (1961) method used in the first edition, which is a subroutine in supplemental computer pro- ‘gram B-31 noted on your diskette] have been recomputed using plane strain adjustments where L/B > 1. Comparing the computed gut to the measured values indicates none of the several theories/methods has a significant advantage over any other in terms of a best predic- tion. The use of o>» instead of gy, when L/B > 1 did improve the computed qu forall except the Balla method. ‘Since the soil wedge beneath round and square bases is much closer to a triaxial than plane strain state, the adjustment of dy, to dys is recommended only when L/B > 2.ene nee TABLE 452 ‘Shape and depth factors for use in either the Hansen Depth factors ‘Shape factors 4, = 1+ 2tan gl = singe TABLE 4.56 ‘Table of inclination, ground, and base factors for the Hansen (1970) equations. See Table 4-Se for equivalent ‘Vesié equations. Tnaaton coe Cron in ep) ; enas-os vee ao 10" aR fe > fy = (1-050 BF gy = 10+ Bang detind above Base factors ted base) yon = 1045 eLmematata ene erry for all @ O7K, La 2 4-[-yraeens bag @-9 san = 10-048, 206 4,-1.0 forall = fy O7=msOnH, nai 7 oo m= 10-048 308 [Sateen its z bewes b, = exp(-2qund) Na < b= ex-270004) 1. Nee ue of efleve tre mesons hy Hane unt y We : Sues 2 The values shove re consistent with ier vera load or vera led accompa ie by shan land |3 With vera lad and load Me (ad eer Hy ~ 0 oc He > 0) you may have © ompte to es of sap a ds a, 2 dg dF L uber of, (G22 greene in Se. +6 use te Lex D/L. ows 1 Use Haier Hp oH, orbahit Hy > 0. ct giv i for > , The va above om Hansen 1961)TABLE 45¢ ‘Table of inclination, ground, and base factors for the Vesié (1973, 1975b) bearing-capacity equations. See notes below and refer to sketch for identification of terms. For: LB £2080 Oy UB >2 8 by = 15 6-17 e534 we a= Ops Hi 4 0- rraieas Fag + Py 2S) a