Foundation Design Principles and Practices 3rd Edition Coduto Solutions Manual

Foundation Design Principles and
Practices 3rd Edition Coduto Solutions

Manual
Visit to download the full and correct content document: https://testbankdeal.com/dow
nload/foundation-design-principles-and-practices-3rd-edition-coduto-solutions-manual
/
Chap. 9 Spread Footings-Geotechnical Design
9.1 Which method of expressing footing width criteria (allowable bearing pressure or design chart)
would be most appropriate for each of the following structures?
a) A ten-story reinforced concrete building
b) A one-story wood frame house
c) A nuclear power plant
d) A highway bridge
Solution
a) A ten-story reinforced concrete building: This structure is likely to have a significant
variety of column loads and the design loads are likely to change during the design
process. It is an ideal candidate for the design chart method.
b) A one-story wood frame house: The allowable bearing stress method is most appropriate
for this structure. Presumptive allowable bearing stresses from building codes would be
appropriate unless soil conditions are unusual.
c) A nuclear power plant: This is a case where individual footing design would be
appropriate due to the high cost of failure and sensitivity of such a facility.
d) A highway bridge: A bridge will have only a few foundations to be designed, one for
each abutment and bent or pier. In this case, individual design is most appropriate.
Solutions Manual
Foundation Engineering: Principles and Practices, 3rd Ed 9-1
© 2016 Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ. All rights reserved. This publication is protected by Copyright and written permission should be obtained from
the publisher prior to any prohibited reproduction, storage in a retrieval system, or transmission in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying,
recording, or likewise. For information regarding permission(s), write to: Rights and Permissions Department, Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ 07458.
9.2 Explain why an 8-ft wide footing with q = 3,000 lb/ft2 will settle more than a 3-ft wide one
with the same q.
Solution
Larger footings produce large pressure bulbs than smaller footings. Therefore, large footings
compresses larger volume of soil, thus undergo more vertical settlement.
Solutions Manual
9.3 Under what circumstances would bearing capacity most likely control the design of spread
footings? Under what circumstances would settlement usually control?
Solution
Bearing capacity will generally control design only for short-term conditions on soft cohesive
soils or when footings are very narrow. In most other circumstances settlement will control the
design.
Solutions Manual
9.4 A proposed building column will carry a downward maximum unfactored load combination of
250 k and a service load of 185 k. This column is to be supported on a square footing at a
depth of 7 ft in a silty sand with the following engineering properties: γ = 119 lb/ft3 above the
groundwater table and 122 lb/ft3 below, c’ = 0, φ’ = 32o, N60 = 30. The groundwater table is
15 ft below the ground surface. The allowable settlement, δa, is 0.75 in. The ASD, factor of
safety against a bearing capacity failure is 2.5. Determine the design footing width clearly
identifying whether it is controlled by settlement or bearing capacity.
Solution
σ 'z D (119)(7)
= = − 0 833 kPa
For φ ′ = 32 : Nc = 44, Nq = 28.5, Nγ = 28.0 (from Table 7.1)
o
From Eq. 7.4 q= n 1.3c′N c + σ zD

′ N q + 0.4γ ′ BNγ
= 1.3 ( 0 lb/ft 2 ) ( 52.6 ) + ( 833 lb/ft 2 ) ( 28.5 ) + 0.4 (119.0 lb/ft 3 ) B ( 28.0 )
= 23,740 lb/ft 2 + B (1,333 lb/ft 3 )
23,740 lb/ft 2 + B (1,333 lb/ft 3 )
qa =
2.5
= 9,496 lb/ft + 533B
2
Wf =
(150 lb/ft 3 )( B 2 )(7 ft) 1,050 B 2
ULS
250,000 lb + 1,050 B 2
9,=
496 lb/ft 2 + 533B = , B 5.4 ft
B2
SLS
185, 000 lb + 1050 B 2
=
9, 496 lb/ft 2 + 533B = , B 4.7 ft
B2
ULS controls, B = 5.4 ft
Say B = 5 ft 6 in
Solutions Manual
9.5 A building column carries a downward factored ultimate load of 310 kN and a service load of
200 kN. It is underlain by a lightly overconsolidated clay (OCR = 2) with the following
engineering properties: Cc = 0.20, Cr = 0.05, e = 0.7, and γ = 15.0 kN/m3 above the
groundwater table and 16.0 kN/m3 below. The groundwater table is at a depth of 1.0 m below
the ground surface. Using LRFD, determine the design footing width clearly identifying
whether it is controlled by settlement or bearing capacity.
Solution
Assumptions
a) Estimated depth of D = 1.0 m, from Table 9.1, minimum is D= 0.3 m
b) Estimate Friction angle,φ’ = 32o from Fig. 3.13, (SP-SM, Dr = 25 – 50%), therefore, Nc = 44,
Nq = 28.5, Nγ = 28.0, from Table 7.1
c) Cohesion, c’=0
=σ 'z D (15.0 kN/m

= 3
)(1.0 m) − 0 15 kPa
From Eq. 7.4 q=

n 1.3c′N c + σ zD
′ N q + 0.4γ ′ BNγ
= 1.3 ( 0 kN/m 2 ) ( 52.6 ) + (15.0 kN/m 2 ) ( 28.5 ) + 0.4 (15.0 kN/m3 ) B ( 28.0 )
= 427.5 kN/m 2 + (168.0 kN/m3 ) B
γ 
= φ qn − γ D  c  , φ = 0.85 φrom Table 7.2 and γ D = 1.2 φrom ASCE−7
From Eq. 9.16 q A,ULS
D
 23.6 kN/m3 
= (0.85) ( (427.5 kN/m ) + B(168.0 kN/m ) ) − (1.2) 
2 3

 1.0 m 
= 335.1 kN/m 2 + (142.8 kN/m3 ) B
ULS
Pu
From Eq. 9.18 BULS =
γ 
φ qn − γ D  c  + uD
D
200
=
335.1 kN/m + (142.8 kN/m3 ) B
2
BULS = 0.68 m
Solutions Manual
SLS
PS + W f
=
q A, SLS − uD
A
310 kN + (23.6 kN/m3 )(1)B 2
= −0
B2
310 kN + (23.6 kN/m 2 )B 2
=
B2
310 kN + (23.6 kN/m 2 )B 2
427.5 kN/m 2 + (168.0 kN/m3 ) B =
B2
BSLS = 0.76 m
SLS controls, B = 0.76 m

Say B = 1.0 m
Solutions Manual
9.6 A proposed office building will have unfactored column design loads between 200 and 1000
kN and service loads between 150 and 700 kN. These columns are to be supported on spread
footings which will be founded in a silty clay with the following engineering properties: γ =
15.1 kN/m3 above the groundwater table and 16.5 kN/m3 below, su = 200 kPa,
Cr/(1+e0) = 0.020, σm = 400 kPa. The groundwater table is 5 m below the ground surface.
The required factor of safety against a bearing capacity failure must be at least 3 and the
allowable total settlement, δa, is 20 mm and the allowable differential settlement, δDa, is 12
mm.
Prepare both serviceability and bearing capacity design charts, using ASD for ULS analysis.
Then, comment on the feasibility of using spread footings at this site.
Solution
Serviceability design Charts
Pmin = 200 kN
Pmax = 700 kN
δ a = 20 mm
δ Da = 12 mm
δ δ
δ Da < δ a ( D ); D = 0.8 from Table 8.3
δ δ
12 mm < 16 mm, therefore δ D a controls.
δ Da
So set δ a =
= , δ 15 mm
(δ D / δ ) a
Selected Loads (kN): 200, 300, 400, 500, 600
Calculation example for load = 200 kN
Estimated depth of footing of Df = 1.0 m from Table 9.1
Try B = 1.5
(200 kN) + (23.6 kN/m3 )(1.5 m) 2 (1.0 m)

q − 0 = 112.5 kPa
(1.5 m ×1.5 m) 2
=σ 'z D (15.0
= kN/m3 )(1.5 m) 22.5 kPa
Depth of Influence = 2B = 2(1.5) = 3.0 m
Cc  σ zf′ 
From Eq. 8.24 δ c = r Σ H log 
1 + e0  σ ′  , Assume r = 0.85
 z0 
Solutions Manual
At midpoint of layer
Layer H σ'z0 Δσz σ'zf Cr δc
No. (m) zf (m) (kPa) (kPa) (kPa) Case 1 + e0 (mm)
1 0.25 0.13 17 89.4 106.2 OC-I 0.02 4.00
2 0.25 0.38 21 75.1 95.3 OC-I 0.02 3.33
3 0.5 0.75 26 42.9 69.1 OC-I 0.02 4.21
4 0.5 1.25 34 20.7 54.4 OC-I 0.02 2.08
5 1 2.0 45 9.1 54.1 OC-I 0.02 1.60
6 1 3.0 60 4.2 64.2 OC-I 0.02 0.59
7 1.5 4.3 77 2.2 79.3 OC-I 0.02 0.36
8 1.5 5.8 87 1.2 88.4 OC-I 0.02 0.18
9 2 7.5 99 0.7 99.6 OC-I 0.02 0.12
10 3 10.0 116 0.8 116.1 OC-I 0.02 0.09
Σ= 16.5
δ = (0.85) 16.5 = 14.0 mm
For B = 1.5 m, settlement, δ = 14 mm, thus, we have met the footing width to meet the allowable
settlement criteria, 14.0 mm ≤ 15.0 mm . Therefore for the load of 200 kN the footing width is
1.5 m. Similarly all the remaining loads shall be calculated and meet the criteria as previously
stated.
Shown below is the design table for the serviceability loads and footing widths.
Loads B
(kN) (m)
200 1.5
300 2.0
400 2.5
500 3.0
600 3.5
50% of δa = 7.5 mm, Say δa = 8 mm
Loads B
(kN) (m)
200 2.5
300 3.0
400 3.5
500 4.0
600 4.5
150% of δa = 22.5 mm, Say δa = 23mm
Loads B
(kN) (m)
200 1.0
300 1.5
400 2.0
500 2.5
600 2.0
Solutions Manual
Bearing capacity design Charts
Try B = 1.0
=σ 'z D (15.0
= kN/m3 )(1.0 m) 15.0 kPa
For su = 200 kPa, c’ = su, φ ′ = 0o, Nc =5.7, Nq = 1.0 and Nγ = 0.0 (from Table 7.1)
From Eq. 7.4 q=n 1.3c′N c + σ zD
′ N q + 0.4γ ′ BNγ
= 1.3 ( 200 kN/m 2 ) (5.7) + (15.0 kN/m 2 ) (1.0 ) + 0.4 (15.1 kN/m3 ) (1.0) ( 0.0 )
= 1497.0 kN/m 2
qn
From Eq. 9.2=
Pa A − γ c AD
F
1497.0 kN/m 2
= (1.0 m) 2 − (23.6 kN/m3 )(1.0 m) 2 (1.0 m)
3
= 475.4 kN
For Pa = 475 kN,, the load of 700 kN does not meet the requirement P < Pa. Therefore try
another width to meet the criteria.
Try B = 1.3 m, Pa = 803 kN, therefore for load of 700 kN, the footing width will be 1.3 m.
Shown below is the design table for the bearing loads and footing widths.
Loads B
(kN) (m)
700 1.3
750 1.4
800 1.5
900 1.6
1000 1.7
Solutions Manual
9.7 Repeat Problem 9.6 using LRFD for the ULS analysis and assuming the factored ultimate
loads range from 250 to 1350 kN. Service loads range remains as stated in Problem 9.6
Solution
Try B = 1.0
=σ 'z D (15.0
= kN/m3 )(1.0 m) 15.0 kPa
For su = 200 kPa, c′ = su, φ ′ = 0o, Nc =5.7, Nq = 1.0 and Nγ = 0.0 (from Table 7.1)
From Eq. 7.4 q=

′ N q + 0.4γ ′ BNγ
= 1.3 ( 200 kN/m 2 ) (5.7) + (15.0 kN/m 2 ) (1.0 ) + 0.4 (15.1 kN/m3 ) (1.0) ( 0.0 )
= 1497.0 kN/m 2
From Eq. 9.4 Pu + γ D ( γ c AD ) ≤ ff

qn A, = 0.85 from Table 7.2
1100 kN + (23.6 kN/m3 ) ( (1.2)(1.0 m) 2 (1.0 m) ) ≤ (0.85)(1497.0 kN/m 2 )(1.0 m) 2
1128.3 ≤ 1272.5,OK
Loads B
(kN) (m)
1100 1.0
1150 1.1
1200 1.2
1250 1.2
1300 1.5
Solutions Manual
9.8 A proposed industrial building will carry unfactored column loads ranging from 280 to 1200
kN and service loads from 230 to 950 kN. The allowable settlements are δa, = 30 mm and
δDa = 12 mm. It is supported on a cohesionless sand with, φ’ = 35o and γ = 19.2 kN/m3.
Footings at this site will be at a depth of 2.2 m and the ground water table is at 5m. A
dilatometer test run at the site has returned the following modulus profile.
Prepare both serviceability and bearing capacity design charts, using ASD for ULS analysis.
Then, comment on the feasibility of using spread footings at this site.
Depth (m) 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
M (MPa) 18.3 20.6 19.0 21.1 35.2 40.0 37.3 30.1 31.9 40.0 40.8 42.0
Solution
Serviceability Design Charts
Pmin = 230 kN
Pmax = 950 kN
δ a = 30 mm
δ Da = 12 mm
δ δ
δ Da < δ a ( D ); D = 0.8 from Table 8.3
δ δ
12 mm < 24 mm, therefore δ D a controls.
δ Da
So set δ a =
= , δ 15 mm
(δ D / δ ) a
=σ 'z D (19.2
= kN/m3 )(2.2 m) 42.2 kPa
Try B = 1.0 m
(250 kN) + (23.6 kN/m3 )(1.0 m) 2 (2.2 m)

q − 0 = 301.9 kPa
(1.0 m ×1.0 m) 2
Solutions Manual
Depth H M Iq Δσz = qʹ × Iq δ = (Δσz ×H)/M

(m) (m) (MPa) From Eq. (kPa) (m)
3.14
2 1 18.3 0.705 192.8 0.0105
3 1 20.6 0.169 46.3 0.0022
4 1 19.0 0.067 18.2 0.0010
5 1 21.1 0.035 9.6 0.0005
6 1 35.2 0.021 5.8 0.0002
7 1 40.0 0.014 3.9 0.00010
8 1 37.3 0.010 2.8 0.00008
9 1 30.1 0.008 2.1 0.00007
10 1 31.9 0.006 1.7 0.00005
11 1 40.0 0.005 1.3 0.00003
12 1 40.8 0.004 1.1 0.00003
13 1 42.0 0.003 0.9 0.00002
0.0147 m
Σ
15 mm
For B = 1.0 m, settlement, δ = 15 mm, thus, we have met the footing width to meet the allowable
settlement criteria, 15.0 mm ≤ 15.0 mm . Therefore, for the load of 250 kN the footing width is
1.5 m. Similarly all the remaining loads shall be calculated and meet the criteria as previously
stated.
Loads B
(kN) (m)
250 1.0
450 2.0
550 2.5
750 3.0
950 4.0
Similarly, 50% and 150% of δa. shall be calculated with the appropriate widths
=σ 'z D (19.2
= kN/m3 )(2.2 m) 42.2 kPa
For φ ′ = 35o, Nc =57.8, Nq = 41.4 and Nγ = 47.3 (from Table 7.1)
Try B = 1.0
Solutions Manual
From Eq. 7.4 q=

′ N q + 0.4γ ′ BNγ
1.3(0)(57.8) + ( 42.2 kN/m 2 ) ( 41.4 ) + 0.4 (19.2 kN/m3 ) (1.0) ( 47.3)
=
= 2,110 kN/m 2
Assume a Factor of Safety = 3
qn
A − γ c AD
From Eq. 9.2=
Pa
F
2,110 kN/m 2
= (1.0 m) 2 − (23.6 kN/m3 )(1.0 m) 2 (2.2 m)
3
= 651.5 kN
For Pa = 651.5 kN, the load of 1,000 kN does not meet the requirement P < Pa. Therefore try
For B = 1.3 m, Pa = 1,163 kN, therefore load of 1,000 kN meet the criteria, therefore the footing
width will be 1.3 m.
Loads B
(kN) (m)
1000 1.3
1050 1.4
1100 1.5
1150 1.6
1200 1.7
Solutions Manual
9.9 Repeat Problem 9.8 using LRFD for the ULS analysis and assuming the factored ultimate loads
range from 300 to 1500 kN. Service loads range remains as stated in Problem 9.8.
Solution
Try B = 1.0
=σ 'z D (19.2
= kN/m3 )(2.2 m) 42.2 kPa
From Eq. 7.4 q=

′ N q + 0.4γ ′ BNγ
1.3(0)(57.8) + ( 42.2 kN/m 2 ) ( 41.4 ) + 0.4 (19.2 kN/m3 ) (1.0) ( 47.3)
=
= 2,110.3 kN/m 2
Try B = 1.0
From Eq. 9.4 Pu + γ D ( γ c AD ) ≤ ff

qn A, = 0.85 from Table 7.2
1100 kN + (23.6 kN/m3 ) ( (1.2)(1.0 m) 2 (2.2 m) ) ≤ (0.85)(2,110 kN/m 2 )(1.0 m) 2
1,162 ≤ 1, 793, OK
Loads B
(kN) (m)
1100 1.0
1200 1.1
1300 1.2
1400 1.3
1500 1.4
Solutions Manual
9.10 Several cone penetration tests have been conducted at a site underlain by a young, normally
consolidated silica sand deposit. Based on these tests, an engineer has developed the following
design soil profile.
This soil has an average unit weight of 18.1 kN/m3 above the groundwater table and 20.8 kN/m3
below. The groundwater table is at a depth of 3.1 m. An office building with a parking structure
is to be built at this site with ASD column loads of 400 to 1500 kN and service loads of 380 to
1100 kN. Square footings are to be used at a depth of 1 m. Using these data, create design
charts for both serviceability and ultimate limit states using ASD with a factor of safety of 2.5
and a design life of 50 years.
Hint: In a homogeneous soil, the critical shear surface for a bearing capacity failure extends to a
depth of approximately B below the bottom of the footing. See Chapter 4 for a correlation
between qc in this zone and φ′.
Depth (m) 0 - 2.0 2.0 - 3.5 3.5 - 4.0 4.0 - 6.5

2
qc (kg/cm ) 40 78 125 100
Solution
Estimated friction angles taken from Figure 4.31
Depth qc σ’z φo
(m) (kg/cm2) (kPa)
0.0-2.0 40 36.2 35
2.0-3.5 78 60.5 40
3.5-4.0 125 66.0 42
4.0-6.5 100 93.5 41
From Table 4.8 Es = 3qc
1 kPa = 0.01020 kg/cm 2
Layer Depth qc Es
(m) (kg/cm2) (kPa)
1 0.0-2.0 40 11,765
2 2.0-3.5 78 22,941
3 3.5-4.0 125 36,765
4 4.0-6.5 100 29,412
From Table 5.1 Estimated allowable settlement for office buildings and parking structure, δa =
35 mm
Serviceability Design Charts
Solutions Manual
Assume B = 1.0 m
t = 50 yr
Ie H
=
From Eq. ′ )∑
8.17 δ C1C2C3 ( q − s zD
Es
Depth of Influence Factor = D + 2B = 2 + 2(1.0) = 4
400 kN + (23.6 kN/m3 )(1.0 m) 2 (1.0 m)
q= = 423.6 kPa
(1.0 m) 2
′
s zD =
(18.1 kN/m3 )(1.0 m) 18.1 kPa
 s zD′   18.1 kPa 
From Eq. 8.18 C1 = 1 − 0.5  =
1 − 0.5  =0.98
′ 
 q − s zD  423.6 kPa − 18.1 kPa 
 50 
From Eq. 8.19 C2 = 1 + 0.2 log  =
1.54
 0.1 
1.03 − 0.03L /B 
=
From Eq. 8.20 C3 max =   1
 0.73 
zp (at z = D + B / 2) = ∑ H − u = (18 kN/m )(1.0 m + (1.0 / 2.0) m) − 0 = 27 kPa
′
sg 3
q − s zD′ 423.6 kPa − 18.1 kPa

From Eq. 8.11 I e p =
0.5 + 0.1 =
0.5 + 0.1 =
0.973
s zp′ 18.1 kPa
Layer Es zf Iε H δ
No. (kPa) (m) Eqs. 8.12 & 8.13 (m) Iε H /Es
1 11,765 0.25 0.547 0.5 2.32 × 10-5
2 11,765 0.75 0.828 0.5 3.52× 10-5
3 22,941 1.25 0.497 0.5 1.08 × 10-5
4 22,941 1.625 0.248 0.25 2.71 × 10-6
5 29,412 1.875 0.083 0.25 7.04 × 10-7
Σ= 7.26 × 10-5
δ C1C2C3 ( q − s zD
′ )Σ
Iε H
=
Es
= ( 0.98)(1.54 )(1)( 423.6 kPa − 18.1 kPa ) ( 7.26 ×10−5 )
= 0.044
= m 44 mm
To meet serviceability requirements, δ ≤ δ a ; With B = 1.0 m, δ = 44 mm, therefore iterative

solutions of B should be calculated to meet the allowable settlement.
Solutions Manual
Loads B
(kN) (m)
400 1.5
600 1.8
800 2.1
1000 2.4
1200 2.7
=σ 'z D (18.1
= kN/m3 )(1.0 m) 18.1 kPa
Try B = 1.0
From Eq. 7.4 q=

′ N q + 0.4γ ′ BNγ
1.3(0)(57.8) + (18.1 kN/m 2 ) ( 41.4 ) + 0.4 (18.1 kN/m3 ) (1.0) ( 47.3)
=
= 1, 091 kN/m 2
Factor of Safety = 3
qn
A − γ c AD
From Eq. 9.2=
Pa
F
1, 091 kN/m 2
= (1.0 m) 2 − (23.6 kN/m3 )(1.0 m) 2 (1.0 m)
2.5
= 412.8 kN
For Pa = 412.8 kN, the load of 1,250 kN does not meet the requirement P < Pa. Therefore, try
For B = 1.8 m, Pa = 1,337 kN, therefore load of 1,250 kN will meet the criteria
Loads B
(kN) (m)
1250 1.8
1300 1.9
1350 2.0
1400 2.1
1500 2.2
Solutions Manual
9.11 A proposed building will have column loads ranging from 40 to 300 k. All of these columns will
be supported on square spread footings. When computing the allowable bearing pressure, qA,
which load should be used to perform the bearing capacity analyses? Which should be used to
perform the settlement analyses? Explain.
Solution
Settlement analysis uses the maximum service loads and bearing capacity uses the minimum
column loads. It should be obvious that the maximum service load will generate the lowest
allowable bearing stress for settlement. It is not so obvious that the minimum column load will
control the allowable bearing stress for the ultimate failure mode (bearing capacity). However,
recall the basic bearing capacity equation:
q=
′ N q + 0.4γ ′BN γ (7.4)
The third term in the equation is a function of the footing width, B. Therefore as the column load
increases, the required footing width will increase and thereby increase the nominal bearing
stress. So the minimum bearing stress will be generated by the minimum column load.
Solutions Manual
9.12 A series of columns carrying unfactored vertical loads of 20 to 90 k and service loads from 20 to
75 k are to be supported on 3-ft deep square footings. The soil below is a clay with the following
engineering properties: γ = 105 lb/ft3 above the groundwater table and 110 lb/ft3 below, su =
3000 lb/ft2, Cr/(1+e0) = 0.03 in the upper 10 ft and 0.05 below. Both soil strata are heavily
overconsolidated. The groundwater table is 5 ft below the ground surface. The factor of safety
against a bearing capacity failure must be at least 3. Determine the allowable bearing pressure,
qA, using ASD.
Solution
Pmin = 20 k
Pmax = 75k
c′= su, φ′= 0o: Nc = 5.7, Nq = 1, Nγ = 1, from Table 7.1

σ 'z D (105)(3)=
= − 0 315 lb/ft 2
q=n 1.3c′N c + σ zD
′ N q + 0.4γ ′ BNγ
= 1.3 ( 3,000 lb/ft 2 ) ( 5.7 ) + ( 315 lb/ft 2 ) (1) + (0.4) (110 lb/ft 3 ) B(1)
= 22,545 lb/ft 2 + ( 44 lb/ft 3 ) B
22,545 lb/ft 2 + ( 44 lb/ft 3 ) B
qa =
3
= 7,515 lb/ft + 15 lb/ft 3 B 2
= =
W f (3)( B 2 )(150) 450 B 2
qa,SLS
75,000 lb + 450 B 2
7515 lb/ft 2 + B (15 lb/ft 2 ) =
B2
15 B 3 + 7,065 B 2 − 75,000 = 0
B = 3.25 ft
Plug-in B into the equation, therefore, qa,SLS = 7,563lb/ft2
qa,ULS
20,000 lb + 450 B 2
7,515 lb/ft 2 + B (15 lb/ft 3 ) =
B2
15 B 3 + 7,065 B 2 − 20,000 = 0
B = 1.68 ft
Plug-in B into the equation, therefore, qa,SLS = 7,540lb/ft2
qa,ULS= 7,540 lb/ft2 governs
Solutions Manual
9.13 A square spread footing with B = 1 m and D = 0.5 m supports a column with the following ASD
design loads: P = 150 kN, M = 22 kN-m. The underlying soil has an allowable bearing pressure
of 200 kPa. Is this design acceptable? If not, compute the minimum required footing width and
express it as a multiple of 100 mm.
Solution
=W f (1=
2
)(0.5)(23.6) 11.8 kN
22 kN.m
e = 0.14, from Eq. 6.4
150 kN + 11.8 kN
B 1
= = 0.17
6 6
B
∴ e ≤ , therfore the resultant is in the middle third,thus the design is acceptable
6
Solutions Manual
9.14 A 3 ft x 7 ft rectangular footing is to be embedded 2 ft into the ground and will support a single
centrally-located column with the following factored LRFD ultimate design loads: PU = 50 k,
VU = 27 k, MU = 80 ft-k. VU and MU act in the long direction only. The underlying soil is a silty
sand with c’ = 0,φ’ = 31o, γ = 123 lb/ft3, and a very deep groundwater table. Using LRFD,
determine if this design is acceptable.
Solution
Check for eccentricity
Wf =
(7 ft × 3 ft) 2 (2 ft)(150 lb/ft 3 ) =
6300 lb
80,000 ft-lb
=
From Eq. 6.4 e = 1.42
50,000 lb + 6,300 lb
B 7
= = 1.2,substitute B for L
6 6
B
1.42 > 1.2, ∴ e > , therfore the resultant is not in the middle third, NOT OK
6
For the criterion to meet increase L to 9 ft

B 9
= = 1.5, substitute B for L
6 6
B
∴ e ≤ , therfore the resultant is in the middle third, OK
6
Check for bearing capacity
Use Vesic’s formula
c′ N c sc d cicbc g c + sg
From Eq. 7.13 qn = ′
zD N q sq d qiq bq g q + 0.5 ' BN gggggg
sdibg
c′= 0, φ′ = 31o; Nc = 32.6, Nq = 20.6, Nγ = 25.9, from Table 7.1
=σ 'z D (123 lb/ft

= 2
)(2 ft) − 0 246 lb/ft 2
Shape factors
 B  N 
From Eq. 7.14 sc = 1 +    q 
 L   Nc 
 3   20.6 
= 1+    
 9   32.6 
= 1.21
Solutions Manual
B
From Eq. 7.15 sq = 1 +   tan φ ′
L
3
= 1+   tan(31o )
9
= 1.20
B
From Eq. 7.17 sγ = 1 − 0.4  
L
= 0.86
Depth Factors
k = D/B
From Eq. 7.17 d c = 1 + 0.4k
= 1+0.4(0.6)
= 1.24
From Eq. 7.18 d q =1 + 2k tan φ ′ (1 − sin φ ′ )
2
=1.45
From Eq. 7.19 dγ = 1
Since φ = 0, Load Inclination factors, ic= iq= iγ= 1 , Since φ = 0
Base Inclination factors base footing is level, b=

c b=
q b=
γ 1,
Ground Inclination Factors, ground surface is level (β=0), g=

c g=
g 1
qn = ′
c′ N c sc d c ic bc g c + sgf
zD N q sq d q iq bq g q + 0.5 ' BN gggggg
s d i b g ), = 0.5 from Table 7.2
=(0)+(246 lb/ft 2 )(20.6)(1.20)(1.45)(1)(1)(1)+0.5(123 lb/ft 3 )(9)(25.9)(0.86)(1)(1)(1)(1)
= 20,940 lb/ft 2
From Eq. 7.38 Pn = qn A
= (20, 940 lb/ft 2 )(3.0 ft × 9.0 ft) 2
= 565,380 lb
From Eq. 7.39 Pu + gffg
DW f ≤ Pn , = 0.5 from Table 7.2 and D =
1.2 ASCE-7
50,000 lb - (1.2)(150 lb/ft 3 )(3.0ft × 9.0 ft) 2 (2.0 ft) ≤ (0.5)(565,380 lb)
40, 280 lb ≤ 282,690 lb, OK meets the design requirements
Check for lateral load capacity
From Eq. 7.46 μ = tan (31°) = 0.6
Solutions Manual
Wf =
(3.0 ft × 9.0 ft) 2 (2.0 ft)(150 lb/ft 3 ) =
8,100 lb
1
From Eq. =
7.48 PP tan 2 (45° + 31° / 2)(123 lb/ft 3 )(9.0 ft)(2.0
= ft) 2 6,916 lb
2
1
From Eq. = 7.49 PA tan 2 (45° − 31° / 2)(123 lb/ft 3 )(9.0 ft)(2.0
= ft) 2 708 lb
2
The AASHTO resistance factors come from Table 7.2: for concrete cast on sand φ1 = 0.8, for
passive resistance φ2 = 0.5
0.8 ( 50, 000 lb + 8,100 lb ) 0.6 + 0.5 ( 6,916 lb ) =

From Eq. 7.52 Vn = 31,346 lb =
31.0 k
From Eq. 7.53 Vu + γ 1Pa = (27 k) + (1.5)(0.7 k) = 28.0 k , which is less than the nominal shear
capacity, Therefore the footing has sufficient lateral load capacity.
Solutions Manual
9.15 The serviceability loads for the footing in problem 9.14 are P = 37 k, MU = 40 ft-k, and VU = 0.
The average N60 for the sand below the footing is 28. Determine if this footing meets
serviceability requirements.
Solution
Allowable settlement, δa = 0.75 in
Check for eccentricity
Wf =
(7 ft × 3 ft) 2 (2 ft)(150 lb/ft 3 ) =
6300 lb
40,000 ft-lb
=
From Eq. 6.4 e = 0.92
37,000 lb + 6,300 lb
B 7
= = 1.2,substitute B for L
6 6
B
0.92 ≤ 1.2, ∴ e ≤ , therfore the resultant is in the middle third, OK
6
Determine the influence factors, Io and I1
Io= Df/B = 2/3 = 0.6. From Figure 8.2, Io = 0.99
Zh/B =50/3 = 16.7. From Figure 8.2, I1 = 1.0
From Eq. 4.29
0.47 Pa N 60m (0.47)(2, 000 lb/ft 2 )(28)0.8 13,516

=
OCR = = = 2.01 ≈ 2 , Assume deep
σ 'z (129 lb/ft )(2 ft) + (129 lb/ft )(50 ft) 6, 708
3 3
groundwater depth of 50 ft
4.48 E β 0 OCR + β1 N 60
From Eq.=
From Table 4.7 bb
= 0 =
50,000 lb/ft 2 and 1 12,000 lb/ft 2
E =50, 000 2 + 12, 000 ( 28 ) =406,710 lb/ft 2
(37, 000 lb) + (150 lb/ft 3 )(3 ft × 7 ft) 2 (2 ft)

q = 2, 062 lb/ft 2
(3 ft × 7 ft) 2
qB (2, 062 lb/ft 2 )(3 ft)

8.5 δ I=
From Eq.= 0 I1 ( 0.99 )(1.0 ) = 0.015 ft or 0.2 in
E 406 k
It does meet serviceability requirements, δ ≤ δ a
Solutions Manual
9.16 A combined footing is to be used to support columns A and B with a center to center spacing of
15 ft. The columns carry the following loads:
Column A Column B
P V P V
Ultimate loads 200 50 400 50
Service Loads 150 0 300 0
The underlying soil is a well-graded sand with c’ = 0, φ’ = 36o, γ = 126 lb/ft3, with a very deep
groundwater table. Using LRFD, design a rectangular footing to meet the ultimate limit states.
Assuming the average CPT tip resistance of the sand is 300 kg/cm2, check to see if your design
meets serviceability limits. Adjust the design as needed
Solution
By combining the two isolated footings into a single footing, the eccentric loading can be
eliminated and the bearing pressure be made uniform.
Total ultimate loads = 200 k + 400 k = 600 k

Total shear loads = 50 k + 50 k = 100 k
Total service loads = 150 k + 300 k = 450 k
ULS
Estimated depth of footing of Df = 2 ft from Table 9.1
Try rectangular dimensions, B x L = 5 ft x 20 ft
=σ 'z D (126 lb/ft

= 3
)(2 ft) − 0 252 lb/ft 2
c′= 0, φ’= 36o: Nc = 63.5, Nq = 47.2, Nγ = 56.7, from Table 7.1
Use Vesic’s formula
c′ N c sc d cicbc g c + sg
From Eq. 7.13 qn = ′
zD N q sq d qiq bq g q + 0.5 ' BN gggggg
sdibg
c′= 0, φ′= 36o: Nc = 63.5, Nq = 47.2, Nγ = 56.7, from Table 7.1
=σ 'z D (126 lb/ft

= 2
)(2 ft) − 0 252 lb/ft 2
Solutions Manual
Shape factors
 B  N 
From Eq. 7.14 sc = 1 +    q 
 L   Nc 
 5   47.2 
= 1+    
 20   63.5 
= 1.19
B
From Eq. 7.15 sq = 1 +   tan φ ′
L
 5 
= 1+   tan(36o )
 20 
= 1.18
B
From Eq. 7.17 sγ = 1 − 0.4  
L
= 0.9
Depth Factors
k = D/B, 2/5 = 0.4
From Eq. 7.17 d c = 1 + 0.4k

= 1+0.4(0.4)
= 1.2
From Eq. 7.18 d q =1 + 2k tan φ ′ (1 − sin φ ′ )
2
=1.24
From Eq. 7.19 dγ = 1
Since φ = 0, Load Inclination factors, ic= iq= iγ= 1 , Since φ = 0
Base Inclination factors base footing is level, b=

c b=
q b=
γ 1,
Ground Inclination Factors, ground surface is level (β=0), g=

c g=
g 1
qn = ′
c′ N c sc d c ic bc g c + sgf
zD N q sq d q iq bq g q + 0.5 ' BN gggggg
s d i b g ), = 0.5 from Table 7.2
=(0)+(252 lb/ft 2 )(47.2)(1.18)(1.24)(1)(1)(1)+0.5(126 lb/ft 3 )(5)(56.7)(0.9)(1)(1)(1)(1)
= 33, 477 lb/ft 2
Solutions Manual
From Eq. 7.38 Pn = qn A

= (33, 477 lb/ft 2 )(5ft × 20 ft) 2
= 3,347,700 lb
From Eq. 7.39 Pu + γ DW f ≤ ff

Pn , = 0.5 from Table 7.2 and γ D =
1.2 ASCE-7
600,000 lb - (1.2)(150 lb/ft 3 )(5 ft × 20 ft) 2 (2.0 ft) ≤ (0.5)(3,347, 700 lb)
564, 000 lb ≤ 1,673,850 lb, OK meets the desiγn requirements
SLS
Allowable settlement, δa = 0.75 in
t = 50 yr
From Table 4.8, use Es = 3qc = (3)(300 kg/cm2)(1/0.0004824) = 1,865,761 lb/ft2
1 lb/ft 2 = 0.0004824 kg/cm 2
(450, 000 lb) + (150 lb/ft 3 )(5 ft × 20 ft) 2 (2 ft)

q = − 0 4,800 lb/ft 2
(5 ft × 20 ft) 2
= 4=
Depth of Influence Factor = 20 ft
B 4(5)
= ′ (126
σ zD = lb/ft 3 )(2 ft) 252 lb/ft 2
σ zp′ (at z = D + B) = ∑ γ H − u = (126 lb/ft )(2 ft + 5 ft) − 0 =

3
882 lb/ft 2
q − σ zD′ 4,800 lb/ft 2 − 252 lb/ft 2

From Eq. 8.11 I e p =
0.5 + 0.1 =
0.5 + 0.1 = 0.727
σ zp′ 882 lb/ft 2
Solutions Manual
Es zf Iε H
Layer
(lb/ft2) (ft) Eqs. 8.16 (ft) Iε H /Es
No.
1 1,865,761 0.5 0.234 1 1.26 × 10-7
2 1,865,761 1.5 0.437 1 1.92 × 10-7
3 1,865,761 3 0.625 2 5.53 × 10-7
4 1,865,761 5 0.566 2 7.79 × 10-7
5 1,865,761 7 0.404 2 6.75 × 10-7
6 1,865,761 9 0.242 2 5.71 × 10-7
7 1,865,761 11 0.145 2 4.67 × 10-7
8 1,865,761 13 0.113 2 3.63 × 10-7
9 1,865,761 15.5 0.073 3 3.50 × 10-7
10 1,865,761 18.5 0.024 3 1.17 × 10-7
Σ= 4.19 × 10-6
 σ zD′   252 lb/ft 2 

From Eq. 8.18 C1 =
1 − 0.5  =
1 − 0.5  2 
=
0.972
′ 
 q − σ zD  4,800 lb/ft − 252 lb/ft 
2
 50 
From Eq. 8.19 C2 =
1 + 0.2 log  =1.54
 0.1 
1.03 − 0.03L /B 
= =
From Eq. 8.20 C3 max   1
 0.73 
Iε H
From Eq. 8.17 δ = ′ )∑
C1C2C3 ( q − s zD (0.972)(1.54)(1)(4,800 lb/ft 2 − 252 lb/ft 2 )(4.19 ×10−6 )
=
Es
= 0.028
= ft 0.34 in
Say δ = 1/2 in, meets serviceability requirements
Therefore, B x L = 5 ft x 20 ft meets both bearing and serviceability requirements.
Solutions Manual
9.17 A three-story wood-frame building is to be built on a site underlain by sandy clay. This building
will have wall loads of 1900 lb/ft on a certain exterior wall. Using the minimum dimensions
presented in Table 9.3 and presumptive bearing pressures from the International Building Code
as presented in Table 6.1, compute the required width and depth of this footing. Show your final
design in a sketch.
Solution
Estimated depth of footing of 1.0ft and width of the footing of 1.5ft from Table 9.3
qa = 1500 lb/ft 2 from Table 6.1
1900 lb/ft +(1.5 ft)(1.0 ft)(150 lb/ft 3 )
≤ 1500 lb/ft 2
1.5 ft
∴1416.7 lb/ft ≤ 1500lb/ft 2 , OK
2
Solutions Manual
9.18 A 4 ft square, 2 ft deep spread footing carries an ASD design column load of 50 k. The edge of
this footing is 1 ft behind the top of a 40 ft tall, 2H:1V descending slope. The soil has the
following properties: cʹ = 200 lb/ft2, φʹ = 31, γ = 121 lb/ft3, and the groundwater table is at a
great depth. Compute the ASD factor of safety against a bearing capacity failure and comment
on this design.
Solution
c′= 0, φ′= 31o: Nc = 40.4, Nq = 25.3, Nγ = 23.7, from Table 7.1
′ = (121 lb/ft 3 ) ( 2 ft )
σ zD
= 242 lb/ft 2
q=
′ N q + 0.4γ ′ BNγ
= 1.3 ( 200 lb/ft 2 ) ( 40.4 ) + ( 242 lb/ft 2 ) ( 25.3) + 0.4 (121 lb/ft 2 ) (4 ft)(23.7)
= 21,215 lb/ft 2
50,000 lb + (150 lb/ft 3 )(16 ft 2 )(2ft)
qa =
4×4 ft 2
= 3, 425 lb/ft 2
21,215 lb/ft 2
Factor of Safety = = 6.2, iσ too hiγh and σhould be between the ranγe of 2.5 to 3.5
3,425 lb/ft 2
Solutions Manual
9.19 A Classify the frost susceptibility of the following soils:

e) Sandy gravel (GW) with 3% finer than 0.02 mm.
f) Well graded sand (SW) with 4% finer than 0.02 mm.
g) Silty sand (SM) with 20% finer than 0.02 mm.
h) Fine silty sand (SM) with 35% finer than 0.02 mm.
i) Sandy silt (ML) with 70% finer than 0.02 mm.
j) Clay (CH) with plasticity index = 60
Solution
Based on Table 9.4
a) Sandy gravel (GW) with 3% finer than 0.02 mm. Group F1—very low susceptibility.
b) Well graded sand (SW) with 4% finer than 0.02 mm., Group F2—low susceptibility.
c) Silty sand (SM) with 20% finer than 0.02 mm. Group F4—high susceptibility.
d) Fine silty sand (SM) with 35% finer than 0.02 mm. Group F4—high susceptibility.
e) Sandy silt (ML) with 70% finer than 0.02 mm. Group F4—high susceptibility.
f) Clay (CH) with plasticity index = 60. Group F3—Moderate susceptibility.
Solutions Manual
9.20 A compacted fill is to be placed at a site in North Dakota. The following soils are available for
import: Soil 1 - silty sand; Soil 2 - lean clay; Soil 3 - Gravelly coarse sand. Which of these soils
would be least likely to have frost heave problems?
Solution
Soil-3, the gravelly course sand would be in Group F1, per Table 9.4, which is the group with the
lowest susceptibility to frost heave.
Solutions Manual
9.21 Would it be wise to use slab-on-grade floors for houses built on permafrost? Explain.
Solution
No, because it can result from ground thawing and cause distress to the structure.
Solutions Manual
9.22 What is the most common cause of failure in bridges?
Solution
Scour
Solutions Manual
9.23 A single-story building is to be built on a sandy silt in Detroit. How deep must the exterior
footings be below the ground surface to avoid problems with frost heave?
Solution
To avoid frost heave, the footing should be at a depth below expected frost penetration. Using
Figure 9.10 (and google maps for those who don’t know the location of Detroit) the depth of
frost penetration is approximately 50 in. Therefore footings should be founded at a depth of 50
in (1.3 m) or deeper.
Solutions Manual
9.24 A column carries the following factored ultimate loads PU = 1200 kN and PN = 300 m-kN. The
service loads are PU = 950 kN and PN = 30 m-kN. The footing for this column is to be founded
at a depth of 1.5-m on a underlying cohesive soil with su = 200 kPa, Cr/(1+e0) = 0.040, and
OCR = 6. The design a footing for this column using LRFD.
Solution
c′= su, φ’= 0o: Nc = 5.7, Nq = 1, Nγ = 1, from Table 7.1
Assume a unit weight of 18.5 kN/m3

σ 'z D (18.5)(1.5)
= = − 0 28 kN/m 2
q=
′ N q + 0.4γ ′ BNγ
= 1.3 ( 200 kN/m 2 ) ( 5.7 ) + ( 28 kN/m 2 ) (1) + (0.4) (18.5 kN/m3 ) B (1)
= 1510+7.4B
Service Loads, Pu = 950 kN
950kN + (23.6)(1.5m)( B 2 )
qa −0
B2
950kN + (23.6)(1.5m)( B 2 )
= 1510+7.4B
B2
∴B = 0.8 m
950 kN + (23.6)(1.5 m)(0.82 )
qa = − 0 1520 kPa
0.82
∴ qa , SLS =1,520 kPa
f qn A − γ DW f γ 
q A,ULS = = f qn − γ D  c  , f =
0.5
A D
ff
=
qn 1.3c′N c + σ zD
′ N q + 0.4γ ′ BNγ
(
= 0.5 1.3 ( 200 kN/m 2 ) ( 5.7 ) + ( 28 kN/m 2 ) (1) + (0.4) (18.5 kN/m3 ) B (1) )
= 755 + 3.7 B
 23.6 kN/m3 
q A,ULS =(755 + 3.7 B ) − 1.2  
 1.5 m 
= 736.1+3.7 B
1,200 kN
−=
0 736.1 + 3.7 B
B2
∴ B = 1.3 m
q A,ULS = 736.1+3.7(1.3)
= 741 kPa
The design of the footing width is 1300 mm with an allowable bearing capacity of 741 kPa
Solutions Manual
9.25 A geotechnical engineer has provided the following design parameters for a cohesionless soil at a
certain site: qA = 4000 lb/ft2, μa = 0.41, KA = 0.33, KP = 3.0. The groundwater table is at a depth
of 20 ft. A column that is to be supported on a square spread footing on this soil will impart the
following ASD load combinations onto the footing: P = 200 k, V = 18 k. Determine the required
width and depth of embedment for a square footing to support this column.
Solution
Estimated minimum depth of embedment is 1.0 ft from Table 9.1
200, 000 lb + (150 lb/ft 3 )(1.0 ft)( B 2 )
q =
(B2 )
200, 000 lb + (150 lb/ft 3 )(1.0 ft)( B 2 )
4000 =
(B2 )
∴B = 7.2 ft
From Eq. 3.36 and 3.38, back calculating the lateral earth pressures gives φ = 30o
From Table 3.2 typical unit weight of a cohesionless soil = 110 lb/ft3
From Eq. 7.46: μ = tan (30°) = 0.58
=
W f (7.2 ft)(7.2 ft)(1.0 ft)(150 lb/ft 3 ) 7,776 lb
1
=
From Eq 3.39 PP = K p (110 lb/ft 3 )(7.2 ft)(1.0 ft) 2 1,188 lb
2
1
=
From Eq 3.37 PA = K a (110 lb/ft 3 )(7.2 ft)(1.0 ft) 2 131 lb
2
Use a factor of safety of 1.5
From Eq. 7.47 Va = ( P + W f - u f A ) ma +
0.5 PP
- PA
F
0.5(1,188 lb/ft 2 )
= ( 200,000 lb + 7,776 lb - 0 ) 0.41+ - 131 lb/ft 2
1.5
= 85 k
Since V ≤ Va (18 k ≤ 85 k), the footing has sufficient lateral load capacity.
Therefore, B = 7.2 ft and D = 1.0 ft
Solutions Manual
9.26 Six cone penetration tests and four exploratory borings have been performed at the site of a
proposed warehouse building. The underlying soils are natural sands and silty sands with
occasional gravel. The CPT results and a synthesis of the borings are shown in Figure 9.17. The
warehouse will be supported on 3 ft deep square footings that will have ultimate LRFD design
downward loads of 100 to 600 k and serviceability loads of 100 to 480 k. The allowable total
settlement is 1.0 in and the allowable differential settlement is 0.5 in. Using ASD with these data
and reasonable factors of safety, develop design charts for vertical loads (both ultimate and
serviceability) and values of, μa, KA, and KP for lateral design.
Solution
A number of solutions are available. See instructor spreadsheets for some examples
Solutions Manual
9.27 Using the design values in Problem 9.26, determine the required width of a footing that must
support the following ASD load combinations:
a. Max load combination: P = 200 k, V = 0
Service loads: P = 180 k, V = 0
b. Max load combination: P = 200 k, V = 21 k
c. Max load combination: P = 440 k, V = 40 k
d. Max load combination: P = 480 k, V = 40 k
Solution
A number of solutions are available. See instructor spreadsheets for some examples
Solutions Manual

Foundation Design Principles and Practices 3rd Edition Coduto Solutions Manual

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Foundation Design Principles and Practices 3rd Edition Coduto Solutions Manual

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Foundation Design Principles and

Practices 3rd Edition Coduto Solutions

From Eq. 7.4 q= n 1.3c′N c + σ zD

a) Estimated depth of D = 1.0 m, from Table 9.1, minimum is D= 0.3 m

=σ 'z D (15.0 kN/m

From Eq. 7.4 q=

SLS controls, B = 0.76 m

Serviceability design Charts

Calculation example for load = 200 kN

Estimated depth of footing of Df = 1.0 m from Table 9.1

(200 kN) + (23.6 kN/m3 )(1.5 m) 2 (1.0 m)

Depth of Influence = 2B = 2(1.5) = 3.0 m

50% of δa = 7.5 mm, Say δa = 8 mm

150% of δa = 22.5 mm, Say δa = 23mm

Bearing capacity design Charts

Calculation example for load = 700 kN

Estimated depth of footing of Df = 1.0 m from Table 9.1

Calculation example for load = 1100 kN

Estimated depth of footing of Df = 1.0 m from Table 9.1

From Eq. 7.4 q=

From Eq. 9.4 Pu + γ D ( γ c AD ) ≤ ff

Serviceability Design Charts

Calculation example for load = 250 kN

(250 kN) + (23.6 kN/m3 )(1.0 m) 2 (2.2 m)

Depth H M Iq Δσz = qʹ × Iq δ = (Δσz ×H)/M

Bearing capacity design Charts

For φ ′ = 35o, Nc =57.8, Nq = 41.4 and Nγ = 47.3 (from Table 7.1)

From Eq. 7.4 q=

Assume a Factor of Safety = 3

Bearing capacity design Charts

Calculation example for load = 1100 kN

For φ ′ = 35o, Nc =57.8, Nq = 41.4 and Nγ = 47.3 (from Table 7.1)

From Eq. 7.4 q=

From Eq. 9.4 Pu + γ D ( γ c AD ) ≤ ff

Depth (m) 0 - 2.0 2.0 - 3.5 3.5 - 4.0 4.0 - 6.5

From Table 4.8 Es = 3qc

1 kPa = 0.01020 kg/cm 2

Serviceability Design Charts

Selected Loads (kN): 400, 600, 800, 1000, 1200

Calculation example for load = 400 kN

q − s zD′ 423.6 kPa − 18.1 kPa

To meet serviceability requirements, δ ≤ δ a ; With B = 1.0 m, δ = 44 mm, therefore iterative

Bearing capacity design Charts

For φ ′ = 35o, Nc =57.8, Nq = 41.4 and Nγ = 47.3 (from Table 7.1)

From Eq. 7.4 q=

c′= su, φ′= 0o: Nc = 5.7, Nq = 1, Nγ = 1, from Table 7.1

qa,ULS= 7,540 lb/ft2 governs

For the criterion to meet increase L to 9 ft

Check for bearing capacity

Use Vesic’s formula

c′= 0, φ′ = 31o; Nc = 32.6, Nq = 20.6, Nγ = 25.9, from Table 7.1

=σ 'z D (123 lb/ft

Since φ = 0, Load Inclination factors, ic= iq= iγ= 1 , Since φ = 0

Base Inclination factors base footing is level, b=

Ground Inclination Factors, ground surface is level (β=0), g=

Check for lateral load capacity

From Eq. 7.46 μ = tan (31°) = 0.6

0.8 ( 50, 000 lb + 8,100 lb ) 0.6 + 0.5 ( 6,916 lb ) =

Check for eccentricity

Determine the influence factors, Io and I1

Io= Df/B = 2/3 = 0.6. From Figure 8.2, Io = 0.99

Zh/B =50/3 = 16.7. From Figure 8.2, I1 = 1.0

From Eq. 4.29

0.47 Pa N 60m (0.47)(2, 000 lb/ft 2 )(28)0.8 13,516