Fu, D. et al. (2015). Géotechnique 65, No. 3, 231–246 [http://dx.doi.org/10.1680/geot.14.P.

2120]

Effects of preloading with consolidation on undrained bearing capacity of

skirted circular footings
D. F U , C . G AU D I N † , C . T I A N  , B. B I E N E N  a n d M . J. C A S S I DY †

This paper reports a set of centrifuge tests to investigate the increase in bearing capacity of a skirted
circular foundation that results from preloading with consolidation. Results are compared with coupled
numerical analyses using the modified Cam Clay model. Fundamental mechanisms are revealed from
the stress paths followed during preloading and consolidation at the element level, accounting for both
the change in mean normal effective stress and in the hardening parameter. A formulation is
developed to predict the gain in bearing capacity as a function of the level of preloading applied on
the foundation and the degree of consolidation achieved. The formulation provides good agreement
with the centrifuge results.

KEYWORDS: clays; consolidation; footings/foundations; model tests; numerical modelling; offshore

engineering

INTRODUCTION in vertical bearing capacity that results from preloading.

The undrained capacity of shallow foundations is conveni-
ently determined using bearing capacity factors that have
been thoroughly estimated experimentally, analytically and
numerically for a wide range of foundation shape, soil
heterogeneity, soil–foundation interface and load inclination.
More recently, solutions have been developed accounting for
foundation skirt embedment, which are common in offshore
engineering (Martin & Randolph, 2001; Randolph et al.,
2004).
However, none of these approaches allows for the calcula-
tion of the undrained bearing capacity of shallow founda-
tions for conditions of full or partial consolidation due to
the added load on the foundation. In offshore engineering,
preloading may be actively sought using ballast on gravity
platforms and jack-up rigs or, as recently observed in the
Bass Strait in Australia, by applying suction on the under-
side of a foundation base (Watson & Humpheson, 2007).
The aim is to increase the bearing capacity of the foundation
to withstand environmental loadings and to limit further
settlements. Foundation preloading is also encountered on-
shore during staged embankment construction, in buildings
that have additional floors or equipment added, and in
buildings that reuse existing foundations.
Under preloading maintained at a proportion of its ulti-
mate bearing capacity, the soil below a shallow footing
experiences three-dimensional consolidation, resulting in in-
creasing soil strength and stiffness. Analytical solutions that
describe the time–settlement response have been developed
for flat footings on elastic soil (see notably Booker & Small,
1986) and more recently for skirted footings (Gourvenec &
Randolph, 2010).
Only a few studies have attempted to quantify the increase
Manuscript received 31 October 2014; revised manuscript accepted 4
February 2015.
Discussion on this paper closes on 1 August 2015, for further details
see p. ii.
 Centre for Offshore Foundation Systems and ARC Centre of
Excellence for Geotechnical Science and Engineering University of
Western Australia, Perth, Australia.
† Centre for Offshore Foundation Systems, the UWA Ocean Institute
and ARC Centre of Excellence for Geotechnical Science and
Engineering University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia.
Finite-element analyses (Bransby, 2002; Zdravkovic et al.,
2003; Gourvenec et al., 2014), model test data (Bienen et
al., 2010; Acosta-Martinez & Gourvenec, 2010) and field
test data (Lehane & Jardine, 2003) on circular flat or skirted
foundations indicate a consistent trend of increase in bearing
capacity with preloading (up to a ratio of 3 .6 times the
initial bearing capacity) and an obvious dependency of the
increase on the foundation shape, the presence of a skirt and
the degree of consolidation of the soil.
It is noteworthy that the existing database is for fully
consolidated response and does not cover conditions of
partial consolidation (with the exception of Gourvenec et al.
(2014), as discussed further). An extended coverage for
partial consolidation is particularly relevant for offshore
foundations because methods to accelerate consolidation are
often impractical and loading is often applied before full
consolidation is achieved. The need for solutions under
partial consolidation conditions was reinforced by the physi-
cal modelling data of Bienen et al. (2010), which demon-
strated the dominant effect of consolidation on the increase
in bearing capacity (i.e. a higher gain in capacity is obtained
by increasing the degree of consolidation rather than by
increasing the preloading level). 提高固结程度比提高预压水平能获得更高的承载力提高增益
The effect of magnitude and duration of preloading was
investigated, more recently by Gourvenec et al. (2014), for
smooth (frictionless) and rough (fully bonded) shallow foot-
ings using finite-element analyses of two-dimensional (2D)
(strip) and axisymmetric (circular) footings with a modified
Cam Clay (MCC) constitutive model. A single unloading–
reloading path was assumed as an average of the soil
response, irrespective of the initial stress state within the soil
at the onset of consolidation. A hardening law that linked
the foundation bearing capacity to the accumulated settle-
ment during consolidation was established, enabling the
estimation of the gain in bearing capacity due to preloading.
Although this simplified approach is elegant, it does not
necessarily represent the real (and numerous) stress paths
that are followed in the soil mass during undrained shearing
generated by preloading, which affects the soil behaviour
during the associated consolidation.
This paper reports centrifuge tests of a circular skirted
foundation subjected to increasing levels of preloading and
degrees of consolidation. The experimental results are

231

Downloaded by [ Tianjin University] on [14/02/22]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 232 FU, GAUDIN, TIAN, BIENEN AND CASSIDY
compared to numerical results from a comprehensive finite-
element analysis, using the MCC model, which provides
insights into the complex effective and total stress paths
followed at the soil element scale throughout the entire
preloading and consolidation process. Based on the under-
standing of preloading and consolidation mechanisms at both
macro and element scale, the time-related gain in undrained
bearing capacity resulting from preloading and consolidation
is established.
PHYSICAL MODELLING OF THE PRELOADING OF
SKIRTED CIRCULAR FOUNDATION
The experiments were conducted in the beam centrifuge
at the University of Western Australia under an acceleration
of 200g. The facility, described in Randolph et al. (1991),
was recently enhanced with a wireless high-speed data
acquisition system (Gaudin et al., 2009) and a state-of-the-
art motion control system (De Catania et al., 2010). Com-
bined with remote control capability, this enables the load
control tests to be conducted over a period of time exceed-
ing 24 h, ensuring that nearly full consolidation can be
achieved. 离心机实验能干24个小时吗，对于这种固结的问题，这也太恐怖了吧？
Centrifuge tests were performed in normally consolidated
kaolin clay, with characteristics presented in Table 1, after
Stewart (1992). The undrained shear strength profiles were
inferred from T-bar penetrometer tests using a T-bar factor
NT-bar of 10 .5 (Low et al., 2010). The strength profiles
exhibit a shear strength ratio su / v9 that ranges from 0 .19 to
0 .23. This is consistent with the value calculated from Ladd
et al. (1977)
固结程度系数
su n
¼ aOCR (1)
 v9
where  v9 is the vertical effective stress, OCR is the over-
consolidation ratio, and a and n are parameters ranging
between 0 .16 and 0 .23, and 0 .7 and 0 .8, respectively, for
kaolin clay reconstituted in the centrifuge (Stewart, 1992).
The measured values are common for T-bar penetration in
centrifuge kaolin samples, acknowledging that the shear
strength from the triaxial compression is slightly higher
(Lehane et al., 2009).
Tests were performed with a skirted circular foundation
of diameter D ¼ 70 mm and skirt length d ¼ 14 mm (see
Fig. 1). At 200g, this represents a footing 14 m in
diameter with an embedment ratio, d/D, of 0 .2 (see scaling
factors in Garnier et al. (2007)). The model was instru-
mented with a pore pressure transducer (PPT) at the
footing invert to monitor the development of pore pressures
and assess the degree of consolidation during preloading.
Table 1. Soil characteristics for the kaolin clay used in the physical and numerical modelling
Parameters
Slope of critical state line (CSL) in p9–qd space, M (critical friction angle in triaxial compression, 9tc )
Void ratio at p9 ¼ 1 kPa on CSL, ecs
Void ratio at p9 ¼ 1 kPa on normally consolidated line (NCL), eN
Virgin compression index, º
Swelling and recompression index, k
Spacing ratio, r
Shear modulus, G9
Submerged unit weight, ª9: kN/m3
Coefficient of earth pressure, K0
Soil permeability, ks: m/s
Initial coefficient of consolidation, cv0 (at OCR ¼ 1, and  v9 ¼ 3 kPa): m2/s
 The permeability k is taken as a constant, as to derive a c ¼ p9 (1 + e )k /ºª of 3 .8 3 108 m/s.
s v0 0 0 s
Downloaded by [ Tianjin University] on [14/02/22]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
Connection
to actuator
Pore pressure Load cell
transducer
Vent
t ⫽ 0·6 mm
D ⫽ 70 mm
d ⫽ 14 mm
Fig. 1. Skirted circular foundation model and instrumentation
The foundation was rigidly connected to a 2D actuator that
could either push the foundation into the soil at a constant
velocity (i.e. under displacement control) or apply a con-
stant load (i.e. under load control). A load cell assembled
at the foundation–actuator interface was used to monitor
the load experienced by the foundation continuously at a
sampling rate of 10 Hz and with a resolution of  2%.
Testing was performed in three stages. First, the footing
was installed vented at 1g, until full contact was achieved
with the soil, and was subsequently sealed. Then, penetration
was performed at a normalised velocity vD/cv0 of 184 (with
v the velocity of 0 .1 mm/s, and cv0 the coefficient of
consolidation of 3 .8 3 108 m2/s at the stress level con-
sidered) to ensure undrained behaviour without rate effects
enhancing the soil strength. The penetration was pursued
either until failure was reached (to establish the ultimate
undrained vertical bearing pressure, q0) or until the targeted
preload, qp (which defined the preloading level P% ¼ qp /q0),
was attained. In the latter case, the targeted preload was
maintained constant, allowing for consolidation to occur, and
the pore pressure at the footing invert was monitored. After
the required degree of consolidation U% was achieved
(estimated from the pore pressure measurements), the foot-
ing was further penetrated at the same velocity until a new
failure state was attained.
The testing programme is presented in Table 2. Test
NC-T1-0P-0U is the reference test to determine the
ultimate undrained vertical bearing pressure, q0, of the
固结度的计算公式是什么？？？
0 .890
2 .140
2 .251
0 .205
0 .044
2
50p90
6
0 .612
8 .4 3 109
3 .8 3 108
w
 CONSOLIDATED UNDRAINED BEARING CAPACITY OF SKIRTED CIRCULAR FOOTINGS 233
Table 2. Centrifuge programme

Test Preloading pressure, Preloading level, Consolidation time, Consolidation level,

qp: kPa qp /q0: % t: s U: %

NC-T1-0P-0U 0 0 0 0
NC-T2-25P-90U 10 .58 25 15876 90
NC-T3-45P-90U 19 .04 45 13947 90
NC-T4-48P-41U 20 .30 48 400 41
NC-T5-50P-61U 21 .15 50 2000 61
 The testing nomenclature is soil sample (NC for normally consolidated soil)-test number-preloading level (25P for preloading level
P% ¼ qp /q0 3 100% ¼ 25%)-degree of consolidation (90U for degree of consolidation U% ¼ 90%).

skirted circular foundation. Four additional tests were per-
formed, which varied the preloading level P% from 25% to
50% and the degree of consolidation U% from 41% to 90%.
NUMERICAL MODELLING OF THE PRELOADING OF
SKIRTED CIRCULAR FOUNDATION
Soil model and parameters
The numerical analyses were performed using the MCC
soil model, which was implemented in the commercial soft-
ware Abaqus (Dassault Systèmes, 2010). The analyses were
fully coupled to model the excess pore pressure generation
and dissipation with the volumetric strain change. The soil
properties were based on those for kaolin clay, as presented
in Table 1. The soil was considered linear elastic before
yielding with a shear modulus, G9, that linearly varies with
the initial mean normal effective stress, p90 :
In all analyses, the soil was considered to be consolidated
in a K0-consolidated stress state (Wroth, 1984), with K0
given by
K 0 ¼ 1  sin 9tc ¼ 0.612 (9tc ¼ 22:88) (2)
where 9tc is the critical friction angle in triaxial compres-
sion.
At a given depth, z, the initial mean normal effective
stress, p90 , and the initial deviatoric stress, qd0, can be
expressed as
(2K 0 þ 1)ª9z
p90 ¼ and qd0 ¼ (1  K 0 )ª9z
3
where ª9 is the submerged unit weight of the soil. The
initial size of the yield locus is determined by the initial
pre-consolidation pressure, p9c0 , as
q2d0
p9c0 ¼ þ p90
M 2 p90
horizontal displacement on the lateral boundaries and zero
vertical displacement at the base. A free boundary was only
allowed at the top surface, which was defined as a per-
meable boundary. 上边界排水条件
The skirted circular foundation was modelled as a rigid
body (e.g. undeformable). It was assigned a unit weight
equal to the submerged unit weight of the soil. This facili-
tated setting the geostatic stress field and created no buoy-
ancy loads with penetration. The soil–foundation interface
was considered either fully bonded to the foundation or fully
smooth (with zero shear stress at the interface). The model
adopted in this study was established in axisymmetric condi-
tions using first-order fully integrated axisymmetric stress–
pore fluid continuum elements, as shown in Fig. 2.
A fine mesh domain (with the minimum size of an
element, ˜h, established as ˜h/D ¼ 0 .01) was established
around the foundation skirts, with a coarser mesh domain in
the far-field boundary, which allowed the problem to be
accurately modelled at considerably reduced computational
expense. The total soil domain comprised 1600 elements.
Validation of the numerical model against existing solu-
tions is provided in the Appendix.
Finite-element analyses. The finite-element analyses estab-
lished the gain in vertical bearing capacity that results from
preloading with consolidation. The ultimate undrained
vertical bearing pressure, q0, was first determined for the
(3)
Symmetric axis
(4)
Skirted circular footing

The initial void ratio, e0, is calculated from

0·2D
e0 ¼ eN  k lnp90  (º  k)ln p9c0 (5) D/2

In addition, eN, can be expressed as

RP
eN ¼ eCS þ (º  k)ln(r) (6) 7D

where k is the swelling and recompression index and r is

the spacing ratio, which defines the ratio of pressures be-
tween the normal compression line and the critical state line.

Geometry, foundation model and mesh technique

The skirted circular foundation was modelled with a
diameter D of 14 m, a skirt length d of 2 .8 m (d/D ¼ 0 .2),
and a thickness t of 0 .12 m (ts /D ¼ 0 .0085), which represent
the prototype size model of the centrifuge tests. The soil 7D
domain extended to 7D horizontally and vertically from the
centreline of the skirted circular foundation, with zero Fig. 2. Mesh and boundary conditions (RP: reference point)

Downloaded by [ Tianjin University] on [14/02/22]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 234
rough and the smooth foundations. q0 was established as the
value reached when the load displacement curve exhibits a
plateau. This occurred within a movement of less than 5% of
the foundation diameter.
The subsequent finite-element analyses include simulations
involving preloading the foundation, achieving various de-
grees of consolidation, and determining the post-preloading
vertical bearing capacity. This follows a process identical to
the one used during the physical modelling, for example, (a)
undrained penetration was applied until the targeted level of
preloading was reached, (b) the level of preloading was
maintained until the targeted degree of consolidation was
reached, and (c) further undrained penetration was applied to
establish the post-preloading ultimate vertical bearing capa-
city, qpc.
1首先不排水的贯入施加，直到目标预加载载荷达到
2预加载持续一段时间直至固结度达到要求
3施加向下的位移，达到新的极限承载力
FU, GAUDIN, TIAN, BIENEN AND CASSIDY
COMPARISON OF NUMERICAL AND PHYSICAL
MODELLING
The centrifuge test results are presented in Fig. 3(a) as
bearing pressure, q, against the normalised settlements
˜w/D. Test NC-T1-0P-0U with no preload presents a typical
sharp increase in resistance followed by a hardening re-
sponse post-failure when the foundation further penetrates
into soil with increasing shear strength. The maximum
penetration resistance, q0, which is defined as the value
obtained by intercepting the two asymptotes of the load–
displacement response, as illustrated in Fig. 3(a), is equal to
42 .3 kPa. This results in a bearing factor Nc of approxi-
mately 12 .08 (the shear strength, su0, is taken as an
operative value of 3 .5 kPa at the reference point RP, see
Fig. 2). This value is in good agreement, although slightly

Bearing pressure, q: kPa

0 20 40 60 80 100 120
0
Q (q0 in centrifuge test) AB: the trend line of
averaging bearing
pressure
0·02 AQ, BQ: two
asymptotes for the
trend line
Normalised settlement, Δw/D

0·04 NC-T1-0P-0U (centrifuge)

Consolidation settlement
NC-T2-25P-90U (centrifuge)

NC-T3-45P-90U (centrifuge)
0·06

NC-T4-48P-41U (centrifuge)

NC-T5-50P-61U (centrifuge)
0·08

0·10
(a)

Bearing pressure, q: kPa

0 20 40 60 80 100 120
0

NC-T1-0P-0U (finite element)

0·02
Normalised settlement, Δw/D

NC-T2-25P-90U (finite element)

0·04 NC-T3-45P-90U (finite element)

Consolidation settlement
NC-T4-48P-41U (finite element)

0·06
NC-T5-50P-61U (finite element)

0·08

0·10
(b)

Fig. 3. Comparison of the bearing pressure–displacement curves from the numerical and physical
modelling: (a) physical modelling results; (b) numerical modelling results

Downloaded by [ Tianjin University] on [14/02/22]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 预加载后有两个表现分别是：1.固结沉降，2.贯入阻力的急速增加

CONSOLIDATED UNDRAINED BEARING CAPACITY OF SKIRTED CIRCULAR FOOTINGS 235

higher, with the general solutions presented in the Appendix A second set of numerical analysis was performed, ex-
(Table 4). tending the preloading levels and degree of consolidation
The preloading test load–displacement response is charac- investigated from 10% to 90% and 10% to 100%, respec-
terised (a) by the consolidation settlements, which result tively. Results for a degree of consolidation of 100% are
from consolidation under constant preload, and (b) by a presented in Fig. 4, and the entire results are discussed in
sharp increase in resistance, which is followed by a hard- the following sections.
ening that is similar in shape to the no-preloading case. The
increase in bearing capacity resulting from preloading with e
consolidation is calculated as the maximum-penetration-
CSL NCL
resistance post-preloading test, qpc, (determined following
the same procedure as for the no-preloading test), divided by
q0. Results are presented in Table 3. The values vary from κ dp⬘/p⬘
1 .24 to 1 .59 and increase with both the preloading level and URL X S

the consolidation level.

A first set of numerical analyses was performed on the Y⬘
smooth foundation, which adopted the preloading and con- (Δe)XY
(λ ⫺ κ)dp⬘c /p⬘c
solidation levels used for the centrifuge tests. The load– URL κ
1 Y
displacement curves from the numerical modelling are
presented in Fig. 3(b), and the consolidation settlements and
the bearing pressures are reported in Table 3. The numeri- (Δe)XY ⫽ κ dp⬘/p⬘ ⫹ (λ ⫺ κ)d p⬘c /p⬘c
cally predicted consolidation settlements do not always agree
λ
with that measured in the centrifuge. However, when they
1
do, the entire load–displacement response physically meas-
ured is remarkably well predicted by the numerical simula- lnp⬘
tions. Example cases include tests NC-T3-45P-90U and (a)
NC-T5-50P-61U. The greatest discrepancy is observed for
qd
test NC-T2-25P-90U (the numerical analysis gives a post-
preloading capacity 18% greater than the physical modelling) Post-consolidation yield locus
for which the recorded settlements for the physical modelling Post-penetration yield locus M
are approximately twice those obtained from the numerical Total stress path
Initial yield locus
modelling. The considerable disparity in consolidation settle- B Δu
ments is essentially due to the difficulty in controlling the E
ηi
load applied on very soft soils in the first instants of the test, A
which can results in excessive settlements during the initial O
application of the preloading. This difference highlights the
importance of the penetration process during undrained C D F
shearing in the subsequent consolidation response. p⬘a p⬘b p⬘0 p⬘c p⬘d p⬘f p⬘
e CSL K0-NCL NCL
q/q0
ecs
0 0·5 1·0 1·5 2·0
0 URL

Rough interface A
0·02
Smooth interface
e0 O C
0·04 B D

0·06 Normalised undrained F

E
Δw/D

bearing pressure
0·08 without consolidation

0·10
p⬘ ⫽ 1 kPa p⬘
0·12 Preloading level (P%) from (b)
10% (P10) to 90% (P90)
with the interval of 10%
Fig. 5. Stress path during undrained penetration and consolida-
0·14
tion: (a) elastic and plastic volume change during preloading and
consolidation; (b) effective and total stress path for a soil element
Fig. 4. Numerical modelling results for preloading levels ranging during preloading (O to B) and consolidation (B to E) (K0-NCL,
from 10% to 90% (U% 100%) K0 anisotropical consolidated line; URL, unload reload line)

Table 3. Comparison of increase in bearing pressure between physical and numerical modelling

Test Consolidation settlements, ˜w/D Bearing pressure, q0 or qpc: kPa Increase

Centrifuge test Finite-element Centrifuge test Finite-element Centrifuge test Finite-element

modelling modelling modelling

NC-T1-0P-0U – – 42 .3 48 .4 – –
NC-T2-25P-90U 0 .032 0 .016 63 .1 60 .8 1 .49 1 .26
NC-T3-45P-90U 0 .036 0 .032 67 .2 69 .6 1 .59 1 .44
NC-T4-48P-41U 0 .012 0 .026 54 .6 64 .0 1 .24 1 .32
NC-T5-50P-61U 0 .026 0 .030 62 .2 68 .1 1 .47 1 .41

Downloaded by [ Tianjin University] on [14/02/22]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 236 FU, GAUDIN, TIAN, BIENEN AND CASSIDY
PRELOADING AND CONSOLIDATION STRESS PATHS consolidation can be illustrated by the effective stress path
Volume change at element scale S–X–Y in Fig. 5(a). This path depends on the loading and
The increase in ultimate capacity (qpc /q0) due to preload- consolidation history, but may be simplified using a com-
ing with consolidation is closely related to the increase in bined elastic and plastic volume change based on the critical
shear strength, which is associated with volume changes ˜v state theory
(assuming that the bearing capacity factor Nc remains con-
stant, e.g. the failure mechanism is identical with and with-
dp9 dp9
out preloading and consolidation). The volumetric hardening ˜v ¼ ˜e ¼ ˜ee þ ˜ep ¼ k  (º  k) c (7)
response of a soil element experiencing preloading and p9 p9c

5
4

(a)

40 1·70 b
Effective stress b: P90U0 a bT
path CSL K0-NCL cT
c: P90U10 c dT
Total stress 1·65 d
path d: P90U20
30
e: P90U50
f: P90U100 e
1·60 eT
qd: kPa

Subscript
20 e ‘T’: total stress state
1·55
a → b: Undrained penetration
f (fT) cT bT
10 b cd eT b → f: Consolidation f (fT)
e 1·50
dT
a
CSL NCL
0 1·45
0 20 40 60 80 1 50 100
p or p⬘: kPa ln p or ln p⬘: kPa
(b-1)

40 1·60

b a bT
CSL K0-NCL cT
30 1·55 c
dT
Initial yield locus d
qd: kPa

20 e 1·50
c dT e eT
b d e f (fT) bT

eT cT
10 a 1·45
f (fT)

CSL K0-NCL NCL

0 1·40
0 20 40 60 80 10 100
p or p⬘: kPa lnp or lnp⬘: kPa
(b-2)

Fig. 6. Stress paths for typical soil zones (from small to large deformations) during undrained penetration and consolidation
under a preloading level of 90%: (a) selection of soil elements to plot the stress path curves; (b-1) stress path for element 1;
(b-2) stress path for element 2; (b-3) stress path for element 3; (b-4) stress path for element 4; (b-5) stress path for element 5
(continued on next page)

Downloaded by [ Tianjin University] on [14/02/22]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 CONSOLIDATED UNDRAINED BEARING CAPACITY OF SKIRTED CIRCULAR FOOTINGS 237
The positive/negative sign denotes compression/expansion, During subsequent consolidation, the effective stress path
which depends on the increase/decrease in mean normal travels from B to E. The total stress path holds at point E
effective stress p9 and hardening parameter p9c : (only shown in the p9, p–qd plane). Compression continu-
In a traditional triaxial test, changes in volume due to ously occurs until the final state is reached. Therefore, the
undrained shearing ˜vund and consolidation ˜vcon are as- total volume compression includes the elastic volume com-
sessed by interpreting the entire stress path as shown in Fig. pression (because of an increase of the mean normal effec-
5(b). The initial state is denoted as ‘O’ on the K0-consoli- tive stress p9 from B to E) and the plastic volume
dated compression line ( 19 >  29 ¼  39 ). Under undrained compression (because of increase of the hardening parameter
shearing, the effective stress path approaches the critical p9c from D to F).
state line and reaches point B, which position depends on
the preloading level. The corresponding total stress develops dp9 dp9
from O to E (only shown in the p9, p–qd plane). Elastic ˜vcon ¼ ˜econ ¼ þk þ (º  k) c . 0 (9)
p9 p9c
volume expansion occurs (because of the decrease in p9
from O to B), and is exactly balanced by plastic volume
compression (because of the increase in p9c from C to D), Equation (9) illustrates the relationship between the vol-
resulting in zero volume change ume change and the mean normal effective stress and hard-
ening parameter for a specific soil element, assuming
dp9 dp9
˜vund ¼ ˜eund ¼ k þ (º  k) c (8) constant values of k and º (i.e. the volume change occurs at
p9 p9c a constant rate). However, as described in the following

40 1·75

CSL K0-NCL 1·70

b a bT
30 1·65
f (fT) cT
1·60 c
dT
qd: kPa

e 1·55 d
20
eT
e
1·50
d cT e eT
b c dT 1·45
10
f (fT)
a bT 1·40
CSL K0-NCL NCL
0 1·35
0 20 40 60 80 10 100
p or p⬘: kPa lnp or lnp⬘: kPa
(b-3)

40 1·65
CSL K0-NCL a
b
1·60 bT
f (fT) cT
30 c
dT
1·55 d
qd: kPa

20 e eT e 1·50

d e eT
c dT
b bT 1·45
cT
10
a f (fT)
1·40
CSL K0-NCL NCL
0 1·35
0 20 40 60 80 10 100
p or p⬘: kPa lnp or lnp⬘: kPa
(b-4)

60 1·70
K0-NCL NCL
CSL a
f (fT) 1·65
50 bT
b
1·60
c cT
40 dT
K0-NCL 1·55
d
qd: kPa

eT
30 e 1·50
e
1·45
20 e eT
dT 1·40
d
b c cT f (fT)
10 bT
1·35
a CSL
0 1·30
0 20 40 60 80 10 100
p or p⬘: kPa lnp or lnp⬘: kPa
(b-5)

Fig. 6. (continued)

Downloaded by [ Tianjin University] on [14/02/22]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 238 FU, GAUDIN, TIAN, BIENEN AND CASSIDY
section, the rate of volume change depends on the preload-
ing level.
Prediction of stress paths at macro-scale
To evaluate whether an average stress path can be estab-
lished to provide insights into the macro responses of a
skirted circular foundation that is subjected to preloading, a
series of stress paths were extracted from the numerical
analysis with a preloading level of 90% and a degree of
consolidation of 100%.
Figure 6(a) shows the soil displacement vector contour
under a preloading level of 90% before consolidation starts.
Fig. 6(b) presents the associated effective and total stress
paths, from the onset of preloading to the completion of
consolidation, for five soil elements, which represent five
typical zones of deformations in the vicinity of the founda-
tion.
During consolidation, the average preloading level within
the soil mass (e.g. at macro-scale level) remains constant.
However, at the soil element level, the total stress is reduced
for all deformation zones except the zone at the tip of the
foundation skirt. This result is concomitant with an increase
in deviatoric stresses near the tip of the skirt. This is
associated with the large deformations that the soil experi-
ences around the tip (as evident from Fig. 6(a)), which
originate from a reduction in horizontal stresses and conse-
quently a reduction in total stresses and an increase in
deviatoric stresses.
More interestingly, the effective stress paths exhibit more
significant differences between the different deformation
zones. Under small deformations (elements 1 and 2), the
effective stress path exhibits a long transition period before
reaching the º-compression line. In contrast, the effective
stress path in the large deformation zones (elements 3, 4 and
5) exhibits a short transition and a longer path along the º-
compression line. This result reflects the fundamental differ-
ences in the rate of volume change during consolidation,
which governs the final mean normal effective stress state
and the post-preloading gain in bearing capacity.
Based on the above understanding, Fig. 7 depicts the
conceptual stress paths representing the average soil re-
sponse (e.g. at macro-scale level) under different preloading
levels (low, OO9B9C9, medium, OO0B0C0 and high, OO-B-
C-). For all cases, the total stress (dotted line) remains
evidently constant. With increasing preloading levels, the
final mean normal effective stresses increase (p9 , p0 , p-).
This is associated with a steeper transition to the º-line from
O to B, which are all between the º-line and k-line, and
e Effective stress path
Total stress path
CSL K0-NCL NCL
Ot O⬘t O⬙t O⵮t
O⵮ O⬙ O⬘ O
B⵮ B⬙ B⬘
C⬘
C⬙
C⵮
ln p or ln p⬘
Fig. 7. Conceptual diagram of the stress paths of average soil
response during preloading and consolidation for low, medium
and high levels of preloading
Downloaded by [ Tianjin University] on [14/02/22]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
with increasing plastic compression along the º-line from B
to C.
Figure 7 illustrates the difficulty in establishing a single
stress path at macro-scale for all preloading levels to in-
corporate the volume changes that are associated with the
change in hardening parameter p9c and in mean normal effec-
tive stress p9. A more sensible approach is to directly link
the bearing capacity to the time-related shear strength using
a series of tests exploring various preloading scenarios.
ANALYSIS OF THE FINITE-ELEMENT RESULTS
Initial preloading stage – undrained shearing
The undrained shearing can be regarded as an isochoric
process by assuming that soil particles are incompressible.
During this process, the deviatoric stress increases with the
development of deviatoric strains (d), which links a de-
crease in mean normal effective stress (p9) to an increase in
hardening parameter (p9c ). Undrained hardening results in an
expansion of the yield surface, as illustrated in Fig. 5(b).
It is evident that with increasing preloading levels, strain
hardening is gradually augmented, whereas the undrained
shear strength remains constant. This is because the increase
in preloading level results in a decrease in the mean normal
effective stress p9, which generates an elastic volume expan-
sion. This elastic volumetric expansion (k dp9/p9) compen-
sates the plastic volumetric compression ((º  k)d p9c /p9c )
because of the hardening enhancement, and eventually re-
sults in a constant volume during the preloading shearing
process.
Figure 8 depicts the displacement vector field at 10–80%
of the ultimate capacity, q0, under undrained penetration
(corresponding bearing capacity factors are shown in the
secondary horizontal axis). At low preloading levels, limited
vertical displacements are observed in the soil domain. With
increasing preloading levels, the soil flow changes gradually,
particularly at the tip of the skirt, where displacement
vectors gradually rotate towards the horizontal direction.
This transition affects the magnitude and distribution of the
excess pore pressures, as illustrated in Fig. 9(a), which
shows the contours of excess pore pressures normalised by
the ultimate vertical bearing pressure ˜ui /q0 for the smooth
foundation. Higher excess pore pressures are generated
locally at the foundation skirt tip, and the pore pressure field
extends in depth and width with increasing preloading levels.
Accordingly, the mean normal effective stress, p9, signifi-
cantly decreases, and the hardening parameter, p9c , signifi-
cantly increases in these regions at the end of preloading, as
illustrated in Fig. 8(b).
Although no volume changes occur during preloading, it
is evident that the mean normal effective stress and the
hardening parameter at the onset of consolidation are gov-
erned by the preloading level and the associated soil flow
mechanism and pore pressure distribution. This has a con-
sequence on the subsequent gain in bearing capacity follow-
ing consolidation.
Consolidation stage – development of relevant consolidation
curves
The development of consolidation can be plotted as a
function of the increase in bearing capacity and volume
changes, as illustrated in Fig. 10(a). The consolidation
curves for each preloading level fall into a narrow band and
can be expressed as
˜q qpc_ max  qpc
Uq ¼ 1  ¼ (10)
˜qmax qpc_ max  q0
 CONSOLIDATED UNDRAINED BEARING CAPACITY OF SKIRTED CIRCULAR FOOTINGS 239
Undrained bearing pressure, q: kPa
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
0
P10
P20 P50 Undrained bearing pressure
P30
P40 P60 Undrained bearing capacity factor
P70
P% ⫽ 10%
P80
0·01
P% ⫽ 20%

P90
Normalised settlement, Δw/D

P% ⫽ 30%
0·02 P% ⫽ 40%

Smooth
interface
P% ⫽ 50% P100
0·03 P% ⫽ 60%
Rough
interface

0·04 P% ⫽ 80%
P% ⫽ 70%

0·05
0 3 6 9 12 15 18
Undrained bearing capacity factor, Ncv

Fig. 8. Undrained penetration responses from numerical analyses

based on the increase in bearing capacity, ˜q, or as localised element response, which shows a slower
response than the bearing pressure and settlement
˜e ln (qpc =q0 ) ln (qpc_ max =qpc ) responses. However, even if an average pore pressure
Ue ¼ 1  ¼1 ¼ response for the entire soil domain could be established,
˜emax ln (qpc_ max =q0 ) ln (qpc_ max =q0 )
the mean normal effective stress evolution would not be
(11) able to represent the bearing capacity evolution because
it ignores the evolution of the hardening parameter. Fig.
based on the volume change, ˜e. 12 presents the distribution of the mean normal
However, the consolidation response is usually more con- effective stress (˜p9/p90 ) and the gain in bearing capacity
veniently presented using the excess pore pressure dissipa- (which is illustrated as ˜su /sui, with sui the initial soil
tions of the soil element at the surface level on the shear strength and is essentially equal to qpc /q0,
centreline or the foundation settlement responses, as shown assuming that Nc remains constant) with consolidation
in Fig. 10(b) and Fig. 10(c), respectively. Fig. 10(b) also levels that range from U10 to U100 under a preload level
presents the pore pressure measurements from two centrifuge of P90. At low consolidation levels, the magnitude and
tests, with preloading levels of 25% and 45%. The excess extent of the distribution are significantly different (with
pore pressure dissipation curves reflect the changes in mean higher magnitude and larger distribution of mean
normal effective stress p9 with time, whereas the settlement normal effective stresses), although the discrepancy
curves reflect the volume change with respect to the three- decreases with consolidation time as expected when the
dimensional consolidation problem (accounting for both the stress path reaches the º-compression line, as shown in
volumetric and deviatoric strains). Fig. 7.
As already documented (Bransby, 2002; Zdravkovic et al., (b) The settlement curves show no consistent correlations
2003; Gourvenec et al., 2014), for all three representations with the volume change curves. This is because the
of the consolidation effect, the consolidation curves are not settlements reflect the volumetric strains (because of the
unique for all preloading levels, although they fall within a increasing hardening parameter p9c and the change in
narrow band. Moreover, there are contradictions in the effect mean normal effective stress p9, as illustrated in Fig.
of the preloading level on the consolidation time. The 8(b)), and the deviatoric strains, which result from the
response under the low preloading levels of 10% and 20% change in deviatoric stresses qd. The discrepancy in the
(P10 and P20) exhibits faster consolidation in the early stages consolidation responses under different preloading levels
(Tv , 1 3 102) of the pore pressure representation process. may be explained as follows.
This result is the opposite in the settlement representation. (i) During consolidation for low preloading levels, the
A comparison of the three representations of the consoli- deviatoric strains initially remain constant (or
dation response at low and high preloading levels (P10 and slightly decrease) with increasing consolidation
P90) is illustrated in Fig. 11. The following findings are time, whereas the volumetric strains continuously
evident. increase. These changes initially lead to a consistent
(a) The excess pore pressure dissipation only reflects a response between the settlement and the bearing

Downloaded by [ Tianjin University] on [14/02/22]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 240 FU, GAUDIN, TIAN, BIENEN AND CASSIDY
P% ⫽ 20% P% ⫽ 40% P% ⫽ 60% P% ⫽ 80%

0·8
0·6
0·2
0·4

0·6 0·9
0·8
0·5
0·15 0·3 0·7
0·4
0·10 0·6
0·2 0·3 0·5
0·05 0·2 0·4
0·1
0·3
0·2

(a)

Δp /p ⬘0 Δp ⬘c /p ⬘c Δp /p ⬘0 Δp ⬘c /p ⬘c

⫺0·16, ⫺0·12, ⫺0·08, ⫺0·04

0·8

⫺0·42
0·45
0·02 ⫺0·24 0·05

0·01
⫺0·20
⫺0·16, ⫺0·12, ⫺0·08, ⫺0·04
0·05
⫺0·16
⫺0·12

⫺0·08

⫺0·04

(b)

Fig. 9. (a) Excess pore pressure distribution contours ˜ui /q0 after undrained penetration for increasing preloading levels (smooth
interface); (b) associated increase in hardening parameters for 20% (left) and 80% (right) of preloading

pressure curves, but later cause a delay in the and smooth foundation. The S-shaped development curves
settlement development. can be easily characterised using an exponential expression
(ii) During consolidation under high preloading levels, "
both deviatoric and volumetric strains continuously      #
qpc qpc qpc qpc n
and significantly increase. As a result, the settlement ¼   e ln(2)(T v =T 50 )
q0 q0 q0 q0
curves develop more significantly at the start of the max max ini
consolidation process and reach completion later (12)
than the bearing pressure response.

This result demonstrates that the evolution of the gain in
bearing capacity with time cannot be accurately assessed
using the pore pressure or the settlement response but must
be directly assessed at the macro-scale, as developed in the
next section.
Consolidation stage – quantification of the preloading and
consolidation response at macro-scale
Figures 13(a) and 13(b) show the development of the gain
in bearing capacity, qpc /q0, with normalised consolidation
time, Tv, as a function of the preloading levels for the rough
where Tv ¼ cv0t/D2, (qpc /q0)ini ¼ 1, T50 represents the time at
which the increase in bearing capacity is half the maximum
increase for a given preloading level, and n is the factor that
controls the transition time from the initial value to the
maximum value. The fitted curves on the numerical results
in Fig. 13(a) and Fig. 13(b) assumed an identical time of
Tv ¼ 1 3 104 for the onset of gain in capacity. The fitted
parameters n and T50 are provided for different preloading
levels in Fig. 14(c) and Fig. 14(d), whereas the maximum
gain in bearing capacity (qpc /q0)max is provided in Fig. 14(a).
The associated maximum change in volume ˜emax is pre-
sented in Fig. 14(b) (assuming that Nc is constant), acknowl-
edging that

Downloaded by [ Tianjin University] on [14/02/22]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 CONSOLIDATED UNDRAINED BEARING CAPACITY OF SKIRTED CIRCULAR FOOTINGS 241

1·0 1·0

0·9 P90 for Uq response 0·9

0·8 P90 for Ue response 0·8

Magnification
0·7 for Uq 0·7

Ue ⫽ 1 ⫺ Δe/Δemax
Uq ⫽ 1 ⫺ Δq/Δqmax

0·6 Magnification 0·6

for Ue
0·5 From P10 0·5
to P90
0·4 0·4
From P10
0·3 to P90 0·3

0·2 0·2

0·1 0·1

0 0
1 ⫻ 10⫺5 1 ⫻ 10⫺4 1 ⫻ 10⫺3 1 ⫻ 10⫺2 1 ⫻ 10⫺1 1 ⫻ 100 1 ⫻ 101
Tv ⫽ cv0t /D2
(a)
1·2

1·1

1·0
From P30 to P90
0·9
P20
0·8 P10
Up ⫽ Δu/Δui

0·7

0·6

0·5 NC-T2-25P-90U

0·4 NC-T3-45P-90U
0·3

0·2

0·1

0
1 ⫻ 10⫺5 1 ⫻ 10⫺4 1 ⫻ 10⫺3 1 ⫻ 10⫺2 1 ⫻ 10⫺1 1 ⫻ 100
Tv ⫽ cv0t /D2
(b)
1·0

0·9

0·8

0·7

0·6
Us ⫽ Δw/Δwf

0·5 Preloading level (P%) from 10% (P10)

to 90% (P90) with the interval of 10%
0·4

0·3

0·2

0·1

0
1 ⫻ 10⫺5 1 ⫻ 10⫺4 1 ⫻ 10⫺3 1 ⫻ 10⫺2 1 ⫻ 10⫺1 1 ⫻ 100
2
Tv ⫽ cv0t /D
(c)

Fig. 10. Consolidation curves expressed as a function of the (a) normalised increase in
bearing pressure and void ratio, (b) excess pore pressure dissipation at the centre of the
foundation, and (c) normalised consolidation settlements

Downloaded by [ Tianjin University] on [14/02/22]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 242
1·1
1·0
0·9
Up (pore pressure)
Consolidation degree, U
0·8
0·7 Ue (void ratio)
0·6
0·5
0·4 Us (settlement)
0·3
0·2
Preloading level P10
0·1 Preloading level P90
0 between experimental and numerical results is satisfactory,
0·0001 0·001 0·01
Tv ⫽ cv0t /D2
Fig. 11. Comparison of the different representations of consolida-
tion
   
supc qpc
˜emax ¼ º ln ¼ º ln
su0 max
q0 max
with supc being the consolidation shear strength at the tip of
the skirt.
Examination of Fig. 14 reveals the following points.
(a) The maximum gain in bearing capacity, (qpc /q0)max,
increases with preloading levels and is relatively
independent of the foundation roughness. (qpc /q0)max
corresponds to the maximum volume change (˜e)max
after full consolidation, which is a function of the total
stress level and the final mean normal effective stress, p9.
There is an evident change in the rate of increase of
(qpc /q0)max at low preloading levels, which reflects a
difference in volume change. Under low preloading levels
(P10), the volume changes are essentially governed by
elastic deformations (i.e. the stress path transits toward
the º-line, and the gradient is close to the k-line). With
increasing preloading levels (from P20 to P40), plastic
deformations increasingly contribute to the volume
changes (i.e. the stress path gradient gradually increases
and eventually reaches the º-line), which makes the
volume change more significant with increasing preload-
ing levels. Over a preloading level of 50%, the volume
changes reduce, which is consistent with the difficulty in
compressing the soil after it reaches a low void ratio.
(b) The parameter n increases with increasing preloading
levels, which indicates an earlier completion of con-
solidation for high preloading levels. The parameter n
reflects the change in coefficient of consolidation, cv,
which varies in the MCC model with the mean normal
effective stresses. Initially, consolidation for all preload-
ing cases starts at the same time factor Tv. As the
consolidation progresses, the mean normal effective
stresses for the large preloading case increases to a
higher level, which results in a higher coefficient of
consolidation, faster drainage and earlier consolidation
completion. It is also apparent that the rough footing
consolidates more rapidly than the smooth footing, for
which the consolidation completion is delayed by the
high concentration of excess pore pressures at the tip of
the foundation skirt (Fig. 9).
(c) The parameter T50 decreases with the preloading levels.
T50 controls the rate of gain in bearing capacity during
consolidation. Fig. 14(d) shows that the high preloading
levels always have faster increase in bearing pressure than
the low preloading levels, which indicates a faster volume
change, ˜e (as indicated in Fig. 14(b)). The rough footing
Downloaded by [ Tianjin University] on [14/02/22]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
FU, GAUDIN, TIAN, BIENEN AND CASSIDY
exhibits a higher rate of increase in bearing capacity
(especially at low preloading levels), which is linked to
the generation of higher pore pressures aside the
foundation skirt.
CONCLUSIONS
This paper investigates the gain in vertical bearing capa-
city of skirted circular foundations that result from preload-
ing and consolidation. Both coupled finite-element analysis
and physical modelling were undertaken. The comparison
0·1 1 provided that the consolidation settlements are in agreement,
demonstrating that the gain in undrained bearing capacity
can be accurately predicted by coupled numerical analyses.
The finite-element analyses provide insights into the load
paths and distribution in pore pressures in zones of different
soil deformations in the vicinity of the foundation. It is
demonstrated that the increase in bearing capacity is gov-
erned by the change in mean normal effective stress and the
(13)
hardening parameter at the onset of consolidation, which are
a function of the preloading level and the resulting soil flow
mechanism and pore pressure distribution. Accordingly, the
estimation of the degree of consolidation based on localised
pore pressures dissipation or consolidation settlements can-
not be used to predict accurately the increase in post-
preloading bearing capacity, as they fail to capture some
fundamental aspects of the soil behaviour associated with
the increase in hardening parameter and the change in
deviatoric strains. A different approach is suggested whereby
the gain in bearing capacity is estimated at the macro-scale
level from four parameters, characterising the maximum
increase in bearing capacity, the volume change, the con-
solidation time and the level of preloading, the values of
which are established from the numerical analyses.
The proposed approach is expected to be valid for a wider
range of preloading problems, including notably foundations
with higher embedment ratio or different geometry. Exten-
sion of the analysis to full three dimensions would enable
the preloaded capacity of rectangular foundations to be
determined, with similar confidence.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This work forms part of the activities of the Centre for
Offshore Foundation Systems (COFS), which is supported
by the Lloyd’s Register Foundation as a Centre of Excellence
and now forms one of the primary nodes of the Australian
Research Council (ARC) Centre of Excellence for Geotech-
nical Science and Engineering. Lloyd’s Register Foundation
invests in science, engineering and technology for public
benefit, worldwide.
APPENDIX. MODEL AND MESH VALIDATION
Because there is no published solution for the vertical bearing
capacity of circular skirted foundations on normally consolidated
soils, the numerical finite-element model was validated for a rough
strip foundation using the same mesh and model as the subsequent
analysis on fully bounded and smooth skirted foundations. The
authors compare the uniaxial vertical bearing capacity V/Asu0 with
published solutions from Houlsby & Wroth (1983), Bransby (2002)
and Gourvenec & Randolph (2003) using an upper-bound solution,
the Cam Clay model and the Tresca model, respectively (see Table
4). For a meaningful comparison, the plane strain undrained shear
strength sups, which is associated with K0-consolidated soil, was
calculated from equation (14) (following the relationship that was
established by Wroth (1984) for soil in states C, O and B in Fig. 5).
 CONSOLIDATED UNDRAINED BEARING CAPACITY OF SKIRTED CIRCULAR FOOTINGS 243
Δp/p⬘0 0·0, ⫺0·2 Δsu /sui Δp/p⬘0 0·2, 0·0, ⫺0·2 Δsu /sui Δp/p⬘0 0·2, 0·4 Δsu /sui

0·0 0·0 0·2

0·8, 0·6, 0·4, 0·2

1·0, 0·8, 0·6, 0·4, 0·2
1·0, 0·8, 0·6, 0·4, 0·2
1·0, 0·8, 0·6, 0·4, 0·2
1·0, 0·8, 0·6, 0·4, 0·2 2·0, 1·0, 0·8, 0·6, 0·4, 0·2

(a) (b) (c)

Δp/p⬘0 0·4, 0·6 Δsu /sui Δp/p⬘0 2·0 Δsu /sui Δp/p⬘0 2·0, 3·0, 4·0 2·0, 3·0 Δsu /sui
0·4 0·8, 1·0

3·0, 2·0 4·0, 3·0, 2·0

4·0, 3·0, 2·0 5·0, 4·0, 3·0, 2·0

2·0, 1·0, 0·8, 0·6, 0·4, 0·2 1·0, 0·8, 0·6, 0·4, 0·2
1·0, 0·8, 0·6, 0·4, 0·2 1·0, 0·8, 0·6, 0·4, 0·2
1·0, 0·8, 0·6, 0·4, 0·2 1·0, 0·8, 0·6, 0·4, 0·2

(d) (e) (f)

Δp/p⬘0 3·0, 4·0, Δsu /sui Δp/p⬘0 3·0, 4·0, Δsu /sui Δp/p⬘0 4·0, 5·0, 5·0, Δsu /sui
3·0, 4·0, 5·0, 10·0 5·0, 10·0 5·0, 10·0 3·0, 4·0, 5·0 10·0, 15·0 10·0, 15·0

5·0, 4·0, 3·0, 2·0

5·0, 4·0, 3·0, 2·0 5·0, 4·0, 3·0, 2·0 5·0, 4·0, 3·0
5·0, 4·0, 3·0, 2·0 5·0, 4·0, 3·0, 2·0

2·0, 1·0, 0·8, 0·6, 0·4, 0·2

1·0, 0·8, 0·6, 0·4, 0·2
1·0, 0·8, 0·6, 0·4, 0·2
1·0, 0·8, 0·6, 0·4, 0·2 1·0, 0·8, 0·6, 0·4, 0·2 1·0, 0·8, 0·6, 0·4, 0·2

(g) (h) (i)

Δp/p⬘0 3·0, 4·0, 5·0, 3·0, 4·0, Δsu /sui

10·0, 15·0 5·0, 10·0

5·0, 4·0, 3·0

5·0, 4·0, 3·0, 2·0

2·0, 1·0, 0·8, 0·6, 0·4, 0·2

1·0, 0·8, 0·6, 0·4, 0·2

(j)

Fig. 12. Evolution of the mean normal effective stress and the undrained shear strength during consolidation under a preload level of
90%: (a) P90U10; (b) P90U20; (c) P90U30; (d) P90U40; (e) P90U50; (f) P90U60; (g) P90U70; (h) P90U80; (i) P90U90; (j) P90U100

 
sups su p9cs p90 M cos Ł p9c0 ¸ 1 þ 2K 0 difference in initial state between the two models, as presented in
¼ ¼ pffiffiffi (14)
 v9 p9cs p90  v9 3 2p90 3 Fig. 15. The MCC soil model in this study was constructed to ensure
that the hardening parameter and the vertex of initial yield locus
where were identical for the two models. Hence, the initial state differs
ºk between the two models, which results in a slight difference in
¸¼ (15) results.
º The model was further validated by comparing the consolidated
and Ł is the Lode angle. Other parameters were adjusted to account response with results from Bransby (2002) under a preloading level
for the plane strain conditions as presented in Table 1. The results of of 50% and a degree of consolidation of 18%, 55%, 89% and 100%.
the present study are notably consistent with the upper-bound The normalised vertical bearing capacity that corresponds to each
solution from Houlsby & Wroth (1983) with a difference of 0 .01%. consolidation level that was calculated using the MCC model is
The difference is 7 .8% with the solution from Bransby using the consistently approximately 8% lower than those from Bransby using
Cam Clay model. This discrepancy is expected because of the the Cam Clay model.

Downloaded by [ Tianjin University] on [14/02/22]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 244 FU, GAUDIN, TIAN, BIENEN AND CASSIDY
2·0
Maximum enhancement for NOTATION
respective preloading level cv0 initial coefficient of consolidation
1·8 cv coefficient of consolidation
D diameter of skirted circular foundation
d skirt length
1·6 Preloading level (P%) from d/D embedment ratio
qpc /q0

10% (P10) to 90% (P90) with ecs intercepts of critical state line (CSL) with the
the interval of 10%
1·4
compression plane (at p9 ¼ 1 kPa)
eN intercepts of isotropic compression line (NCL) with the
compression plane (at p9 ¼ 1 kPa)
1·2 e0 initial void ratio
G9 elastic shear modulus
K0 coefficient of lateral earth pressure
1·0 k shear strength gradient
0·00001 0·0001 0·001 0·01 0·1 1
ks soil permeability
Tv ⫽ cv0t/D2
(a)
M gradient of critical state line (CSL) in the (p–qd) plane
2·0 Nc vertical undrained bearing capacity factor
Maximum enhancement for NT-bar T-bar bearing factor
respective preloading level n fitting parameter controlling the transition time from
1·8 the initial bearing pressure value to the maximum value
P% preloading level
p9 mean normal effective stress
1·6
p9c pre-consolidation pressure (hardening parameter)
qpc /q0

Preloading level (P%) from

10% (P10) to 90% (P90) with p9cs mean normal effective stress at the failure state
1·4 the interval of 10% p9c0 initial pre-consolidation pressure
p90 initial mean normal effective stress
q bearing pressure
1·2 qd deviatoric stress
qd0 initial deviatoric stress
qp targeted preload
1·0
qpc consolidated undrained vertical bearing capacity (e.g.
0·00001 0·0001 0·001 0·01 0·1 1
Tv ⫽ cv0t/D2
post preloading)
(b) qpc_max maximum consolidated undrained vertical bearing
pressure
(qpc /q0)max maximum gain in consolidated undrained vertical
Fig. 13. Enhancement in bearing pressure with (a) settlements
bearing pressure
and (b) time factor for rough and smooth skirted circular
q0 ultimate undrained vertical bearing capacity
foundations: (a) preloading responses (P10–P90) with time for a
r spacing ratio
rough foundation; (b) preloading responses (P10–P90) with time for
su undrained shear strength
a smooth foundation

2·0 0·14

0·12
1·8
0·10
(qpc/q0)max

1·6
(Δe)max

0·08

0·06
1·4
0·04
1·2
Rough interface 0·02 Rough interface
Smooth interface Smooth interface
1·0 0
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Preloading level, P% Preloading level, P%
(a) (b)
0·90 0·012

0·010
0·85
0·008

n 0·80 T50 0·006

0·004
0·75
Rough interface 0·002 Rough interface
Smooth interface Smooth interface
0·70 0
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Preloading level, P% Preloading level, P%
(c) (d)

Fig. 14. Variations of the fitting parameters of equation (10) with the preloading levels: (a) variation of (qpc /q0)max with the
preloading levels; (b) variation of (˜e)max with the preloading levels; (c) variation of n with the preloading levels;
(d) variation of T50 with the preloading levels

Downloaded by [ Tianjin University] on [14/02/22]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 CONSOLIDATED UNDRAINED BEARING CAPACITY OF SKIRTED CIRCULAR FOOTINGS 245
Table 4. Finite-element results of the undrained bearing capacity

Reference V0 /su0 ˜v: %

Strip foundation Rough kD/su0 ¼ 6 Present study 10 .38 –

Finite-element results† (Bransby, 2002) 11 .26 7 .81%
Finite-element results‡ (Gourvenec & Randolph, 2003) 10 .62 2 .26%
Upper bound (Houlsby & Wroth, 1983) 10 .37 0 .01%
Skirted circular foundation Rough Present study 10 .88 –
Present study‡ 11 .02 1 .30%
Smooth Present study 10 .34 –
Present study‡ 10 .40 0 .50%
 Analyses using the modified Cam Clay soil model.
†
Analyses using the Cam Clay soil model.
‡
Analyses using the Tresca soil model.

Cam Clay soil model (Bransby, 2002) k swelling and recompression index
Modified Cam Clay (MCC) soil model (present study) ¸ plastic volumetric strain ratio in critical state model
º virgin compression index
10
CSL  v9 vertical effective stress
9tc critical friction angle in triaxial compression
8
Vertex of initial yield locus
(CC and MCC model) Initial state for
6
qd: kPa

MCC model K0-NCL REFERENCES

Acosta-Martinez, H. & Gourvenec, S. (2010). Installation resistance
4 and bearing capacity of a shallow skirted foundation in clay. In
Physical modelling in geotechnics – ICPMG 2010 (eds. S.
2 Initial state for Springman, J. Laue and L. Seward), vol. 2, pp. 1011–1017.
CC model Boca Raton, FL, USA: CRC Press.
0
Bienen, B., Gaudin, C. & Cassidy, M. J. (2010). Centrifuge study
0 5 10 15 of the bearing capacity increase of a shallow footing due to
p⬘: kPa preloading. In Physical modelling in geotechnics – ICPMG 2010
(eds. S. Springman, J. Laue and L. Seward), vol. 2, pp. 1019–
Fig. 15. Comparison of the modified Cam Clay and Cam Clay soil 1024. Boca Raton, FL, USA: CRC Press.
model in p9–qd space Booker, J. R. & Small, J. C. (1986). The behaviour of an imper-
meable flexible raft on a deep layer of consolidating soil. Int. J.
Numer. Analyt. Methods Geomech. 10, No. 3, 311–327.
su0 initial undrained shear strength at the skirt tip level Bransby, M. F. (2002). The undrained inclined load capacity of shallow
sui initial shear strength foundations after consolidation under vertical loads. In Numerical
supc undrained shear strength at the skirt tip level after models in geomechanics – NUMOG VIII (eds G. N. Pande and
consolidation S. Pietruszczak), pp. 431–437. Boca Raton, FL, USA: CRC Press.
sups undrained shear strength at the skirt tip level in plane Dassault Systèmes (2010). Abaqus analysis users’ manual. Provi-
strain condition dence, RI, USA: Simula Corp.
Tv normalised consolidation time factor De Catania, S., Breen, J., Gaudin, C. & White, D. J. (2010).
T50 fitting parameter Development of a multiple axis actuator control system. In
t elapsed time during consolidation Physical modelling in geotechnics – ICPMG 2010 (eds. S.
ts thickness of skirt Springman, J. Laue and L. Seward), vol. 1, pp. 325–330. Boca
U% consolidation level Raton, FL, USA: CRC Press.
Ue consolidation degree using change of void ratio Garnier, J., Gaudin, C., Springman, S. M., Culligan, P. J., Goodings,
Uq consolidation degree using change of bearing pressure D., Konig, D., Kutter, B., Phillips, R., Randolph, M. F. &
V0 ultimate undrained vertical load Thorel, L. (2007). Catalogue of scaling laws and similitude
v penetration velocity questions in centrifuge modelling. Int. J. Phys. Modelling Geo-
z soil depth tech. 7, No. 3, 1–24.
ª9 submerged unit weight of the soil Gaudin, C., White, D. J., Boylan, N., Breen, J., Brown, T. A., De
˜e change in void ratio Catania, S. & Hortin, P. (2009). A wireless data acquisition
˜econ change in void ratio during consolidation system for centrifuge model testing. Measmt Sci. Technol. 20,
˜ee change in void ratio due to elastic compression or No. 9, 095709.
expansion Gourvenec, S. & Randolph, M. R. (2003). Failure of shallow
˜emax maximum change of void ratio due to preloading with foundations under combined loading. Proceedings of the 13th
consolidation European conference of soil mechanics and geotechnical engi-
˜ep change in void ratio due to plastic compression or neering, Prague, Czech Republic, vol. 2, pp. 583–588.
expansion Gourvenec, S. & Randolph, M. F. (2010). Consolidation beneath
˜eund change in void ratio during undrained penetration circular skirted foundations. Int. J. Geomech. 10, No. 1, 22–29.
˜h size of minimum mesh element Gourvenec, S., Vulpe, C. & Murphy, T. G. (2014). A method for
˜q increase in bearing pressure predicting the consolidated undrained bearing capacity of shal-
˜qmax maximum increase in bearing pressure low foundations. Géotechnique 64, No. 3, 215–225, http://
˜ui initial excess pore pressure dx.doi.org/10.1680/geot.13.P.101.
˜v volume change Houlsby, G. T. & Wroth, C. P. (1983). Calculation of stresses on
˜vcon volume change during consolidation shallow penetrometers and footings. Proceedings of the interna-
˜vund volume change during undrained penetration tional symposium on seabed mechanics (IUTAM/IUGG) (ed. B.
˜w foundation settlement Denness), pp. 107–112. London, UK: Graham and Trotman.
d deviatoric strain Ladd, C. C., Foot, R., Ishihara, K., Schlosser, F. & Poulos, H. G.
i stress level in the (p9–qd) plane (1977). Stress deformation and strength characteristics. Proceed-

Downloaded by [ Tianjin University] on [14/02/22]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 246 FU, GAUDIN, TIAN, BIENEN AND CASSIDY
ings of the 9th international conference of soil mechanics,
Tokyo, Japan, vol. 2, pp. 421–494.
Lehane, B. M. & Jardine, R. J. (2003). The effect of long term pre-
loading on the performance of a vertically loaded footing on
Bothkennar clay. Géotechnique 53, No. 8, 689–695, http://
dx.doi.org/10.1680/geot.2003.53.8.689.
Lehane, B. M., O’Loughlin, C. D., Gaudin, C. & Randolph, M. F.
(2009). Rate effects on penetrometer resistance in kaolin. Géotech-
nique 59, No. 1, 41–52, http://dx.doi.org/10.1680/geot.2007.00072.
Low, H. E., Lunne, T., Andersen, K. H., Sjursen, M. A., Li, X. &
Randolph, M. F. (2010). Estimation of intact and remoulded
undrained shear strengths from penetration tests in soft clays.
Géotechnique 60, No. 11, 843–859, http://dx.doi.org/10.1680/
geot.9.P.017.
Martin, C. M. & Randolph, M. F. (2001). Applications of the lower and
upper bound theorems of plasticity to collapse of circular founda-
tions. In Computer methods and advances in geomechanics (eds
C. S. Desai, T. Kundu, S. Harpalani, D. Contractor and J. Kemeny),
vol. 2, pp. 1417–1428. Boca Raton, FL, USA: CRC Press.
Randolph, M. F., Jewell, R. J., Stone, K. J. L. & Brown, T. A.
(1991). Establishing a new centrifuge facility. In Centrifuge 91
Downloaded by [ Tianjin University] on [14/02/22]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
(eds H.-Y. Ko and F. G. McLean), pp. 3–9. Boca Raton, FL,
USA: CRC Press.
Randolph, M. F., Jamiolkowski, M. B. & Zdravkovic, L. (2004).
Load carrying capacity of foundations. Proceedings of the
Skempton memorial conference (eds R. J. Jardine, D. M. Potts
and K. G. Higgins), vol. 1, pp. 207–240. London, UK: Thomas
Telford.
Stewart, D. P. (1992). Lateral loading of piled bridge abutments due
to embankment construction. PhD thesis, University of Western
Australia, Perth, Australia.
Watson, P. G. & Humpheson, C. (2007). Foundation design and
Investigation of the Yolla A platform. In Offshore site investiga-
tion and geotechnics 2007: confronting new challenges and
sharing knowledge (ed. M. Pourshoushtari), pp. 399–412. Lon-
don, UK: Society for Underwater Technology.
Wroth, C. P. (1984). The interpretation of in-situ tests. 24th
Rankine Lecture. Géotechnique 34, No. 4, 449–489, http://
dx.doi.org/10.1680/geot.1984.34.4.449.
Zdravkovic, L., Potts, D. M. & Jackson, C. (2003). A numerical
study of the effect of pre-loading on undrained bearing capacity.
Int. J. Geomech. 3, No. 1, 1–10.