See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/304900867

SQUARE FOOTINGS ON UNREINFORCED SANDY SLOPES: NUMERICAL

MODELLING USING PLAXIS 3D

Conference Paper · March 2016

CITATIONS READS

2 1,001

2 authors:

Arindam Dey Rana Acharyya

Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati DIT University
280 PUBLICATIONS   802 CITATIONS    26 PUBLICATIONS   130 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Vertical Drains, Preloading and Soft Soil Improvement View project

Rainfall Induced Landslides View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Arindam Dey on 06 July 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 INDIAN GEOTECHNICAL SOCIETY, KOLKATA CHAPTER
GEOTECHNICS FOR INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT

KOLKATA 11th – 12th March 2016, Kolkata, West Bengal, India

SQUARE FOOTINGS ON UNREINFORCED SANDY SLOPES: NUMERICAL

MODELLING USING PLAXIS 3D

Acharyya R., Research Scholar, Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati, Assam -781039
Dey A., Assistant Professor, Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati, Assam -781039

ABSTRACT: This paper reports the numerical finite element analysis to investigate the bearing capacity (qu) of a
square footing located on a sand slope. The effect of angle of internal friction of soil, setback distance and the depth
of embedment of the footing on the bearing capacity (qu) has been investigated. The model has been compared
against the results of the experiments conducted by researchers [1] for square footing of width 8 cm, resting on
unreinforced sandy slope. Qualitative agreement between the experimental and numerical results has been
established, while quantitative disagreement has been exclusively explained. The comparisons elucidate that the
developed finite element model is satisfactory in its performance.

INTRODUCTION made to estimate the bearing capacity of a footing

Conventionally, the ultimate bearing capacity of a
soil is defined as the maximum load that it can
carry without undergoing a failure in shear. The
determination of bearing capacity of a foundation
is one of the prime concerns of a geotechnical
engineer as it helps in the design of a safe
foundation. Investigator [2] was the first to give a
relation to determine the ultimate bearing capacity
of a foundation on a uniform horizontal ground
which is used extensively even today. Later, based
on his proposition, many researchers proposed
their own expressions [3,4,5] to determine the
bearing capacity of a foundation on a uniform
horizontal ground. Most of the above-mentioned
works have been done considering a strip footing
resting on a horizontal ground surface. However,
strip footings are not commonly used as building
foundations except for circumstances of wall
foundations. Hence, the proposed expressions for
estimating the bearing capacity of strip footings
were modified for other shapes (square, rectangular
and circular) of footings resting on horizontal
ground surface.
For footing placed on crest or on the face of a
slope, the bearing capacity of the foundation may
reduce significantly due to the improper formation
of passive resistance zone towards the face of the
slope. In contrast to the footings resting on
horizontal ground, limited attempts have been
placed on the crest or the face of a slope. Most of
the attempts have been made to evaluate the
change in bearing capacity of the footing with the
change in setback distance and embedment depth.
In this regard, experimental studies related to the
behaviour of footings on slopes are rather limited.
Majority of the experimental investigations
[6,7,1,8,9] have been conducted in the laboratory
on dry cohesionless sandy soil with the objective of
estimating the ultimate bearing capacity and the
associated bearing capacity factor (Nγq) while
studying the effect of various influencing
parameters (e.g. setback distance, width of the
footing, relative density of slope material,
steepness of the slope and type of loading on the
footing) on the bearing capacity reduction factor.
Except for very few tests conducted on square
footings resting on the crest of the slope, [1] all the
above-mentioned experimental investigations have
been conducted on strip footings. Researcher [10]
reported the results of the investigations conducted
on a skirted strip footing resting on the crest of
sandy slope. Apart from laboratory investigations,
meagre numbers of field measurement related to
the behaviour of anchored inclined footings on a
natural slope have been reported [11].
It has been observed that much work had been
done for square footing resting on horizontal
ground surface. In case of square footing resting on
Rana Acharyya, Arindam Dey
sloping ground, very limited number investigations
has been recognized [1]. It is common in hilly
regions to find most of the houses resting either on
the slope face or on the slope crest. Moreover,
most of these inhabitations comprises of buildings
resting on shallow square footing which is not
designed in adequate design criteria. If the spread
of habitation in the North-Eastern (NE) regions of
India is glimpsed, one can easily recognize the
locations to be primarily on unreinforced hill-
slopes or terraces of the same. With the passage of
time, growing inhabitation and changing trends of
the building structures (from light-weight Assam-
type housing to multi-storied concrete structures) is
gradually appending to changing deformation and
instability of the slopes because of inadequate
design of the foundation resting on or near the
slope. Hence, based on 3-D simulations, attempt
has been made to understand the effect of various
geotechnical and geometrical parameters on the
bearing capacity of footing resting on or near the
slopes, and the same has been reported in this
article.
Experimental investigations have been conducted
by researchers [1] to estimate the bearing capacity
of footings located on or near the crest of the slope.
In the experimental investigation, the researchers
did not study the effect of all the parameters on
which the bearing capacity of a footing depends
when placed in the vicinity of a slope. The
experimental work of researchers [1] was limited
to study the effect of footing location and footing
width on the ultimate bearing capacity of a square
footing. In the present study, with the aid of
numerical modelling sing commercially available
Finite Element program; PLAXIS 3D v2012, the
work is extended to include the effect of various
other parameters, such as angle of internal friction
of soil, setback distance of footing, embedment
depth of footing and slope angle on the ultimate
bearing capacity of a footing. This attempt is
particularly made to understand the various bearing
capacity scenarios that may emerge due to the
variation in the contributory parameters.
EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION
Researcher [1] investigated experimentally the
effect of the bearing capacity of shallow
foundations on slopes. The investigation had been
performed with square footings of dimension 6, 8
and 10 cm width (B), resting on the sand slope
inside the tank of dimension 100 cm long, 45 cm
wide and 40 cm high. Load was applied
incrementally by a hydraulic jack and maintained
manually with a hand pump. The vertical
displacements were measured by means of
displacement transducers. Settlement data were
recorded using a data acquisition system with a
precision of 0.025 mm. All the tests were
performed on specimens of Playa Catania (Italy)
sand. A series of standard drained shear tests were
carried out to evaluate the internal friction angle of
the model sand using specimens prepared by dry
tamping. The estimated internal friction angle at
the relative density of 87% was approximately
φ=38°, the maximum dry density was γdmax =17.50
kN/m3. Test soil bed was constructed in layers and
the sand was set up to form a slope angle of 30°. It
had been seen that the settlement decreased with
increasing the setback distance for both strip and
square footings
NUMERICAL MODELLING
Brief Overview of PLAXIS 3D
PLAXIS 3D is a finite element package intended
for three-dimensional analysis of deformation,
stability and ground water flow in geotechnical
engineering. Geotechnical applications require
advanced constitutive models for simulations of
non-linear, time-dependent and anisotropic
behaviour of soil or rock. Moreover, since the soil
is multi-phase material, special procedures are
required to deal with hydrostatic and non-
hydrostatic pore pressure in soil. Many
geotechnical projects involve the modelling of
structures and the interaction between structures
and the soil. PLAXIS 3D is equipped with features
to deal with various aspects of complex
geotechnical structures.
Model and Description
Geometry and Boundary Conditions
The model geometry has been formed by
considering footing on slope crest or on the slope
face (Fig. 1). The dimensions of the models have
 INDIAN GEOTECHNICAL SOCIETY, KOLKATA CHAPTER
GEOTECHNICS FOR INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT
KOLKATA 11th – 12th March 2016, Kolkata, West Bengal, India
been chosen in such a way that the “0.1q” stress
contour (q is the stress applied by the footing)
should not be intersected by the side and bottom
edges of the model (Fig. 2). The “0.1q” stress
contour represents the outermost significant stress
isobar beyond which the effect of the applied load
by the footing can be considered to be negligible
(this is in accordance to the Boussinesq’s elastic
stress theory and development of the isobars).
Fig. 1 Typical PLAXIS 3D representation of a
footing on sloping ground
Fig. 2 Schematic definition of a model geometry
for a footing resting on sloping ground (not to
scale)
In the present study, horizontal fixity was given to
the vertical edges of the model (NB: The inclined
face of the sloping ground is not provided with any
fixity, as a footing located on or near the slope face
will be affected by the deformation of the same). In
the bottom edge of the model, both vertical and
horizontal fixity were applied as the base of the
model is assumed to be non-yielding. This
boundary condition is referred as the “standard
fixity” in the software (Fig. 3).
Meshing
To perform finite element calculation, the model
was discretized into smaller finite number of
tetrahedral elements. The basic soil elements of 3D
finite element mesh are the 10-nodedtetrahedral
elements. PLAXIS 3D program allows for a fully
automatic generation of finite element meshes. In
PLAXIS 3D, five basic meshing schemes are
available namely very coarse, coarse, medium,
fine, and very fine. If necessary, user-defined
refinements of the meshes for special conditions
are also possible to be adopted.
Fig. 3 Fixities applied in numerical model for
sloping stratum
Fig. 4 Typical meshing scheme applied in
numerical model for sloping stratum
Typical meshing for models has been shown in
Fig. 4. The mesh should be sufficiently fine to
obtain accurate numerical results (A very coarse
mesh fails to capture the intricate details of the
model behaviour). On the other hand, very fine
meshes should be avoided since it will take
excessive time for calculations. Hence, a
convergence study should be conducted to
determine the optimum mesh configuration for a
stated simulation model.
Footing Location
In order to estimate the bearing capacity of footing
in a numerical framework, various locations of
footings have been chosen for the numerical
Rana Acharyya, Arindam Dey
analyses. Different scenarios have been considered
to represent surface and embedded footings on
sloping ground, and a footing resting on the slope
face as well as (Fig. 5).
Fig. 5 Position of surface and embedded footing in
a sloping stratum
Material Model
The soil is modelled by the linear elastic perfectly-
plastic Mohr-Coulomb (M-C) model which
involves five input parameters, i.e. elastic
parameters (stiffness E and Poisson’s ratio ν) and
strength parameter (φ and c for soil plasticity and ψ
as an angle of dilatancy). This Mohr- Coulomb
model represents a “first-order” approximation of
soil or rock behaviour. It is recommended to use
this model for a first analysis of the problem
considered. For each layer one estimates a constant
average stiffness or a stiffness that increases
linearly with depth. Due to this constant stiffness,
computations tend to be relatively fast and one
obtains a first estimate of deformations. In the
present study, the footing is represented by a plate
element modelled as a linear isotropic material.
In PLAXIS 3D, for cohesionless sand at low stress
level, e.g. near ground surface, it is good to give a
nominal cohesion value for numerical stability in
finite element calculations otherwise truncation
error may occur in numerical computation. Some
numerical issues may also be observed such as
unconfined or nearly-unconfined nodes of the soil
undergoes extreme displacement, termed as shoot
off, which can be observed in the output results.
The error “soil body seems to collapse” may also
be displayed due to excessive settlement and
premature collapse due to the absence of cohesive
bond. Therefore, a nominal cohesion value of
0.3kPa was adopted in the modelling. The soil was
considered to be dry sand but to remove the
computation error; this nominal value of cohesion
was adopted.
Based on the developed 3D simulation models,
several numerical analyses have been conducted in
order to investigate the following:
 Numerical validation of the experimental
work conducted by Castelli and Lentini
(2012)
 Convergence study to determine the
optimum mesh configuration for the
analyses
 Effect of variation of geotechnical and
geometrical parameters for footings resting
on sloping grounds (Parametric study)
o Effect of variation angle of internal
friction of soil (φ)
o Effect of slope angle (β)
o Effect of setback distance (b)
o Effect of depth of embedment of
footing (Df)
The details of the obtained results are elaborated in
the following section.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
Validation of Experimental Investigation
Mesh Convergence Study
A convergence study has been carried out with
typical footing location for five different meshing
schemes (differentiated and represented by their
non-dimensional average element length) to
understand the effect of mesh refinement on the
obtained results. The non-dimensional average
element length is defined as the ratio of the average
element length to the largest geometrical
dimension of the model. Fig. 6 exhibits that beyond
a medium mesh, the obtained results are nearly
identical. Hence, the medium mesh with non-
dimensional average element size ~0.086 is
considered to be optimum for the present
validation study (The largest dimension of the
model is the length considered as 1m).
Validation
For the validation of the experimental studies done
by researchers [1], two different numerical models
have been developed. Initially, the model
dimensions along with material properties have
 INDIAN GEOTECHNICAL SOCIETY, KOLKATA CHAPTER
GEOTECHNICS FOR INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT
KOLKATA 11th – 12th March 2016, Kolkata, West Bengal, India
been adopted as identical and geometrically
representative of the model considered by
researchers [1] in the experimental investigation
supporting an 8 cm square footing (Model 1).
Numerical simulation has been done for this model
with various setback distances of the footing
(Setback distance is the stated as the distance of the
footing from the edge of the slope crest). In this
process, the optimality of the laboratory model [1]
was checked based on the governing criterion of
the intersection of the “0.1q” pressure isobar with
the edges of the model as observed from the
numerical analysis. It has been seen that from the
theoretical approach that the “0.1q” stress isobar
did not get intersected by the bottom edge of the
model, which is indicative that the model chosen
for the laboratory investigation is proper and the
corresponding results obtained are not influenced
by the adjacent boundaries. Fig. 7 shows the
representative pressure isobar as obtained from the
numerical investigation, where it is revealed the
0.1q pressure bulb just touches the bottom
boundary of the model.
Fig. 6 Convergence study for determining the
optimum mesh size
Fig. 7 Pressure bulb formations for Model 1
As mentioned in the previous paragraph, for the
earlier numerical model, the height of the model
has been such that the significant stress isobar
marginally touched the base of the model. As a
precautionary measure, a second numerical model
(Model 2) has been developed with a nominal gap
of 1B (“B” is the width of the footing) provided in
between bottom of significant stress isobar and the
bottom boundary of the simulation model, which
can be seen in Fig. 8 as a results of the numerical
analyses as well.
Fig. 8 Pressure bulb formations for Model 2
Fig. 9 depicts the comparison of the observations
made from the experimental investigation and
numerical simulation results for Models 1 and 2.
The results illustrate the load-settlement
relationships obtained for an 8 cm square footing
resting on the surface of the crest with various
setback distances (b) as have been represented in
Fig. 9. It can be observed that there exists
insignificant variation in the load-settlement
behaviour for the simulation models (Model 1 and
Model 2), while a substantial difference can be
observed between the experimental and simulation
results. This difference is primarily attributed to
difference in some of the parameters of the
investigation which has not been reported by
researchers [1].
Although the strength parameter has been given as
φ = 38°, the article did not report the stiffness
parameters and as a result, the modulus of
elasticity (E = 40 MPa) has been taken in
accordance to the standard references. This
assumption can significantly alter the load-
settlement behaviour as the stiffness of the medium
governs the deformation behaviour of the system,
and the same can be vividly noticed from Fig. 10.
Moreover, it has been observed that there is no
mentioned about the monitoring the required
Rana Acharyya, Arindam Dey
density of the sloping sand bed during its
preparation.
Fig. 9 Comparative load-settlement curves for
experimentations and simulations considering
assumed stiffness parameter
Variation in the density of the bed (which is
assumed to be homogeneous in the numerical
model) can significantly alter the results and
further can be attributed as a factor resulting in the
observed variations. Apart from the above, it has
been mentioned in the article that the angle of
internal friction of the sand (φ) had been obtained
from standard drained shear tests. However, there
always remains an ambiguity whether the same
angle of internal friction had been maintained
during the preparation of the sand bed by
compaction. Based on all these uncertainties,
several trials have been attempted with various
magnitudes of E and φ to obtain the experimental
load-settlement curves. It was observed that
consideration of the elastic modulus (E) = 15 MPa
and strength parameter (φ) = 40° resulted in nearly
similar load-settlement response.
It is revealed from Fig. 10 that significant
similarity has been observed between experimental
and simulation results with the usage of modified
strength and stiffness parameters for footing
setback distances of 0.12 m and 0.21 m. However,
a remarkable difference has been seen for footing
with a setback distance of 0.04 m, which is
possible due to the unwanted variations of the
stiffness and the strength of the soil which was not
properly maintained at the time of preparation of
the sloping model for experimental investigation.
On the contrary, the constitutive models chosen for
simulating the behaviour of the sand bed might
also fail to properly simulate the deformation
behaviour of the sloping face. A different soil
model (although with a pre-assumed load-
deformation behaviour) might be able to provide a
justified similarity with the obtained results.
Fig. 10 Comparative load-settlement curves for
experimentations and simulations considering
back-calculated stiffness and strength parameters
Based on the obtained results and the comparisons
drawn out of them, it can be stated with confidence
that the numerical models developed are able to
validate the experimental investigation with
sufficient agreement.
Parametric Studies on Bearing Capacity for
Footing Resting On Sloping Ground
For footing resting on a sloping ground, the
setback distance is perceived as one of the most
important governing parameter in the assessment
of bearing and deformation characteristics of the
footing. Setback distance elucidates the nearness of
the footing from the face of the slope. The lesser
the setback distance, higher is the possibility of
failure of the footing and exhibiting conditions of
distress due to undesirable deformation. Hence, a
detailed parametric study has been reported
keeping the setback distance as one of the varying
parameters of the simulation results in order to
highlight the effect of the variation of the other
parameters. For a footing resting on a sloping
ground, five different setback distances were
considered namely b/B = 0, 0.5, 1, 2 and 3 in the
analysis, the same has been represented in Fig. 5.
Convergence study
Similar to the convergence reported earlier, a
similar study has been conducted for footings
resting on sloping ground, the results of which are
illustrated in Fig. 11. It can be observed that
 INDIAN GEOTECHNICAL SOCIETY, KOLKATA CHAPTER
GEOTECHNICS FOR INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT
KOLKATA 11th – 12th March 2016, Kolkata, West Bengal, India
beyond a medium mesh, the obtained results are
nearly identical, and hence, all the further studies
for the sloping ground have been carried out with
an average non-dimensional mesh size of nearly
0.12 (The largest dimension of the model for this
study has been considered to be the width of the
model which remains invariant i.e. 12 m for
various simulation scenarios).
Fig. 11 Convergence study for footing resting on
sloping ground
Variation of angle of internal friction (φ)
Fig. 12 illustrates the effect of variation of angle of
internal friction (φ) on the bearing capacity (qu). It
can be observed that combined variation of the
setback distance and angle of internal friction have
significant effect on the above estimates. It can be
noticed that for any setback distance, the increase
in φ resulted in the increase in the magnitudes qu,
the effect being more prominent at higher values of
φ.
Variation of angle of slope (ß)
Change in the slope angle (β) can significantly alter
the stability conditions and bearing capacity
characteristics of the footing resting on the sloping
ground. A footing exhibits a higher bearing
capacity while resting on or near a slope having a
lower magnitude of inclination. Moreover, the
natural stability of the slope is governed by the
slope angle in relation to the angle on internal
friction of the constituent material. For the present
study, a three different slope angles have been
considered namely β = 30°, 35° and 40°. As
expected, it can be observed from Fig. 13 that qu
decreases with the increase in the angle of
inclination of the slope. This is attributed to the
fact that more steeper is the slope, the zone of
passive resistance will be smaller and hence less
resistance towards failure will be offered by the
soil located towards slope face.
Fig. 12 Variation of qu with angle of internal
friction (φ) and setback distance (b/B)
Fig. 13 Variation of qu with angle of slope (ß) and
setback distance (b/B)
Variation of embedment depth ratio from crest
surface (D/B)
Three different embedment depth ratios from the
crest surface were chosen for footing resting on a
sloping ground having D/B = 0.5, 1 and 1.5, so that
the footings can be considered to behave as
shallow footings. Fig. 14 shows that for any
setback distance, the bearing capacity (qu)
increases with the increase in the embedment depth
of footing from the crest surface (D/B), the effect
being more prominent when the footing is located
away from the face of the slope i.e. the footing
exhibits a higher setback distance. The negative
setback distances are for the footings located on the
face of the slope as exhibited in Fig. 5. Such
locations exhibit comparatively low bearing
capacity due to the immensely curtailed
Rana Acharyya, Arindam Dey
development of the passive resistance zone towards
the slope face.
Fig. 14 Variation of qu with embedment depth of
footing (D/B) and setback distance (b/B)
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the present study, the following main
conclusions are drawn:
 Mesh convergence study aided to define a
non-dimensional optimal mesh size for the
PLAXIS 3D models so as to obtain correct
solutions from the numerical simulation.
 Validation of the experimental work
reported by earlier researchers helped to
check the efficacy of the simulation
models. The study also provides an idea
about the back-estimation of missing
experimental parameters.
 It has been observed that bearing capacity
increases with the increase in the angle of
internal friction for footing resting on
sloping ground.
 For variation of embedment depth of the
footing, it has been seen that the bearing
capacity increases with an increase of
embedment depth of the footing owing to
increase in the degree of confinement
restricting the movement of the soil for
footing on sloping grounds.
 For variation of slope angles, it has been
observed that the bearing capacity reduces
with the increase of slope angle for a
constant angle of internal friction. The
reduction of bearing capacity is also
associated with the increased deformation
of the soil towards the slope for increasing
steepness of the slope.
 For variation of setback distance, it has
been perceived that the bearing capacity
View publication stats
increases with the increasing setback
distance.
REFERENCES
1. Castelli, F. and Lentini, V. (2012), Evaluation of
the bearing capacity of footings on slopes,
International Journal of Physical Modelling in
Geotechnics, Vol. 12, Iss. 3, pp. 112-118.
2. Terzaghi, K. (1943), Theoretical Soil Mechanics,
John Wiley and Sons Inc., New York, USA.
3. Meyerhof, G.G. (1957), The ultimate bearing
capacity of foundation on slopes, Proceedings of
4th international conference on soil mechanics and
foundation engineering, Vol. I, pp. 384-386.
4. Vesic, A. S. (1963), Analysis of ultimate loads of
shallow foundation, Journal of Soil Mechanics
Found Division, ASCE, Vol. 99, No. SM1, pp. 45-
73.
5. Hansen, J. B. (1970), A revised and extended
formula for bearing capacity, Danish Geotechnical
Institute, Bulletin 28, pp. 5-11.
6. Shields D.H., Scott J.D., Bauer G.E., Deschenes
J.H. and Barsvary A.K. (1977), Bearing Capacity of
Foundation near Slopes, Proc. 10th International
Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation
Engineering, Tokyo, Japan, 2: 715-720.
7. Bauer G.E., Shields D.H., Scott J.D. and Gruspier
J.E. (1981), Bearing Capacity of Footing in
Granular Slope, Proc. 11th International
Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation
Engineering, Balkema, Rotterdam, The
Netherlands, 2: 33-36.
8. Kumar, S. V. A. and Ilamparuthi, K. (2009),
Response of Footing on Sand Slopes, Indian
Geotechnical Conference, Vol. 77, pp. 622–626.
9. Keskin, M. S. and Laman, M. (2012), Model
Studies of Bearing Capacity of Strip Footing on
Sand Slope, KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering,
Vol. 17, No. 4, pp. 699-711.
10. Azzam, W.R. and Farouk, A. (2010), Experimental
and Numerical Studies of Sand Slopes Loaded with
Skirted Strip Footing, Electronic Journal of
Geotechnical Engineering, Vol. 15, pp. 795-812.
11. Clark, J. I. and Mckeown, S. (1988), Field
measurements of the behaviour of inclined footings
on a natural slope, Canadian Geotechnical Journal,
Vol. 25, pp. 662–674.