Debre Markos University, Civil Engineering A/P 2021/22

CHAPTER THREE

BEARING CAPACITY OF SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS

3.1. Introduction
The lowest part of a structure generally is referred to as the foundation. It is designed to transfer
building loads safely to the underlying ground. Its function is to transfer the load of the structure
to the soil on which it is resting. A properly designed foundation transfers the load throughout the
soil without overstressing the soil. Overstressing the soil can result in either excessive settlement
or shear failure of the soil, both of which cause damage to the structure. Thus, geotechnical and
structural engineers who design foundations must evaluate the bearing capacity of soils.

Foundations can be broadly classified into the following two categories:

 Shallow foundations
 Deep foundations
1. Shallow Foundations
The foundations provided immediately beneath the lowest part of the structure, near to the ground
level are known as shallow foundations. It is the customary practice to regard a foundation as
shallow if the depth of the foundation is less than or equal to the width of the foundation. Shallow
foundations are further classified into the following types:

• Spread or Isolated footings

• Combined footing
• Cantilever footing
• Continuous or wall footing
• Raft foundation

Spread or Isolated Footings: used to support individual column. These are the most
common type of foundation, primarily because of their cost and ease of construction.

Soil Mechanics-II Page 1

Debre Markos University, Civil Engineering A/P 2021/22

Figure 3.1 isolated/spread footing

Combined Footing: supports two or sometimes three column in a row. It’s used when property
lines, equipment locations, column spacing or other considerations limit the footing clearance
at the column locations.

Figure 3.2 rectangular combined footing

Cantilever or Strap Footing: consists of two individual footings connected by a beam called a
strap. Cantilever footing may be used where the distance between the columns is so great that a
trapezoidal combined footing becomes quite narrow, with resulting high bending moments.

Soil Mechanics-II Page 2

Debre Markos University, Civil Engineering A/P 2021/22

Figure 3.3 cantilever or strap footing

Continuous or wall footing or strip footing: In this type of footing, a single continuous
reinforced concrete slab is provided as foundation of load bearing wall. A strip footing is also
provided for a row of columns which are so closely spaced that their spread footings overlap or
nearly touch each other.

Figure 3.4 strip/continuous footing

Mat (Raft) Foundation: a combined footing that covers the entire area beneath a structure and
supports all the columns. Foundation engineers often consider mats when dealing with any one of
the following conditions;

i. The structural loads are so high or the soil conditions so poor that spread footings would
be exceptionally large.
ii. The soil is very erratic and prone to excessive differential settlement.

Soil Mechanics-II Page 3

Debre Markos University, Civil Engineering A/P 2021/22

Figure 3.5 mat or raft foundation

2. Deep Foundations:
When the soil at or near the ground surface is not capable of supporting a structure, deep
foundations are required to transfer the loads to deeper strata. Deep foundations are, used when
surface soil is unsuitable for shallow foundation, and a firm stratum is so deep that it cannot be
reached economically by shallow foundations. The most common types of deep foundations are
piles, piers and caissons.

Pile: is a slender structural member made of steel, concrete or wood. A pile is either driven into
the soil or formed in-situ by excavating a hole and filling it with concrete.

Figure 3.6 pile foundation

Pier: A pier is a vertical column of relatively large cross-section than a pile.

Soil Mechanics-II Page 4

Debre Markos University, Civil Engineering A/P 2021/22

Caisson: is a type of foundation of the shape of hollow prismatic box, which is built above the
ground and then sunk to the required depth as a single unit. It is a watertight box or chamber used
for laying foundation under water.

Figure 3.7 caisson

A foundation is an integral part of a structure. The stability of a structure depends upon the stability
of the supporting soil. They must satisfy the following two design criterias;
1. The foundation must be stable against shear failure of the supporting soil.
2. The foundation must not settle beyond a tolerable limit to avoid damage to the structure.
Therefore;
Bearing capacity: is the ability of soil to safely carry the loads from the superstructure without
undergoing shear failure or excessive settlement/ resulting settlements being tolerable.

3.1.1. Factors affecting bearing capacity

Bearing capacity is governed by a number of factors. The following are some of the more important
ones which affect the bearing capacity.

a. Nature of soil and its physical and engineering properties.

b. Nature of the foundation and other details such as the size, shape, depth below the ground
surface and rigidity of the structure.
c. Total and differential settlements that the structure can withstand without functional
failure.
d. Location of the ground water table relative to the level of the foundation.

3.2. Types of Shear Failures Experienced by Foundation Soil

Depending on the stiffness of foundation soil and depth of foundation, the following are the modes
of shear failure experienced by the foundation soil.
1. General shear failure
2. Local shear failure
3. Punching shear failure

Soil Mechanics-II Page 5

Debre Markos University, Civil Engineering A/P 2021/22

1. General Shear Failure

This type of failure is seen in dense and stiff soil. The following are some characteristics of
general shear failure.
 Continuous, well defined and distinct failure surface develops between the edge of footing
and ground surface.
 Dense or stiff soil that undergoes low compressibility experiences this failure.
 Continuous bulging of shear mass adjacent to footing is visible
 Failure is accompanied by tilting of footing.
 Failure is sudden and catastrophic with pronounced peak in P- curve.
 The length of disturbance beyond the edge of footing is large.
 State of plastic equilibrium is reached initially at the footing edge and spreads gradually
downwards and outwards.

Figure 3.8 general shear failures

2. Local Shear Failure

This type of failure is seen in relatively loose and soft soil. The following are some characteristics
of general shear failure.
 A significant compression of soil below the footing and partial development of plastic
equilibrium is observed.
 Failure is not sudden and there is no tilting of footing.
 Failure surface does not reach the ground surface and slight bulging of soil around the
footing is observed.
 Failure surface is not well defined.
 Failure is characterized by considerable settlement.
 Well defined peak is absent in P- curve.

Soil Mechanics-II Page 6

Debre Markos University, Civil Engineering A/P 2021/22

Figure 3.9 local shear failures

3. Punching Shear Failure
This type of failure is seen in loose and soft soil and at deeper elevations. The following are some
characteristics of general shear failure.
 This type of failure occurs in a soil of very high compressibility.
 Failure pattern is not observed.
 Bulging of soil around the footing is absent.
 Failure is characterized by very large settlement.
 Continuous settlement with no increase in P is observed in P-curve.

Figure 3.10 Punching shear failure

3.3. Bearing capacity Theories

3.3.1. Terzaghi’s Bearing Capacity Theory

Many of the present day principles regarding bearing capacity equations appear to have had their
origin on a failure mechanism proposed by Prandtl in the early 1920s (refer literature for Prandtl’s
failure mechanism). Prandtl developed a bearing capacity equation assuming a smooth
(frictionless) footing and ignoring the weight of the soil in the failure zone. These assumptions are
not true in practice and therefore Prandtl’s equation is never used in practical design, but it was a
beginning.

Terzaghi (1943) used the same form of equation as proposed by Prandtl (1921) and extended his
theory to take into account the weight of soil and the effect of soil above the base of the foundation

Soil Mechanics-II Page 7

Debre Markos University, Civil Engineering A/P 2021/22

on the bearing capacity of soil. Terzaghi suggested that for a continuous, or strip, foundation (i.e.,
one whose width-to-length ratio approaches zero), the failure surface in soil at ultimate load may
be assumed to be similar to that shown in Figure below. Foundations are generally placed on
ground that is well compacted, and hence the assumption of general shear failure is valid. The
effect of soil above the bottom of the foundation may also be assumed to be replaced by an
equivalent surcharge, q = γDf (where 𝜸 is the unit weight of soil above the foundation level).
Terzaghi made the following assumptions for developing an equation for determining qult for a c-
 soil.
 The soil is semi-infinite, homogeneous and isotropic.
 The problem is two-dimensional.
 The base of the footing is rough.
 The failure is by general shear.
 The load is vertical and symmetrical.
 The ground surface is horizontal.
 The overburden pressure at foundation level is equivalent to a surcharge load q′ = Df
where  is the effective unit weight of soil and Df , the depth of foundation less than the
width B of the foundation.

Figure 3.11 Bearing capacity failure in soil under a rough rigid continuous (strip) foundation

Figure 3.12 Derivation of Terzaghi’s bearing capacity equation for strip footing

Soil Mechanics-II Page 8

Debre Markos University, Civil Engineering A/P 2021/22

The failure zone under the foundation can be separated into three parts (see Figure above):
1. The triangular zone ABJ immediately under the foundation
2. The radial shear zones AJE and BJD, with the curves JE and JD being arcs of a logarithmic
spiral
3. Two triangular Rankine passive zones AEG and BDF.
Therefore Terzhagi’s ultimate bearing capacity equations are given as follows based on the above
figure and assumptions.
qu = c ′ Nc + γDf Nq + 0.5BγNγ (Strip or continuous footing)
This equation is called Terzaghi’s bearing-capacity equation.
qu = 1.3c ′ Nc + γDf Nq + 0.4BγNγ (Square footing)
qu = 1.3c ′ Nc + γDf Nq + 0.3BγNγ (Circular footing)
𝐵 1 𝐵
qu = c ′ Nc (1 + 0.3 ( 𝐿 )) + γDf Nq + 2 BγNγ (1 − 0.2 ( 𝐿 )) (Rectangular footing)
Where Nc , Nq , and Nγ are called bearing capacity factors and are given in the following table 3.1.
The terms Nc , Nq , and Nγ are, respectively, the contributions of cohesion, surcharge, and unit
weight of soil to the ultimate load-bearing capacity
C ′ = effective coheion
B = width (diameter in case of circular)of foundation
L = length of foundation

Soil Mechanics-II Page 9

Debre Markos University, Civil Engineering A/P 2021/22

Table 3.1 Terzaghi’s Bearing-Capacity Factors Nc , Nq and N

When ’ = 0, for saturated clays under undrained condition, Nc = ∞ then for rough strip footing:
qult = 5.7cu + Df
Note; when a soil fails by local shear, the actual shear parameters c and  are to be reduced as per
Terzaghi (1943). The lower limiting values of c and  are;
 ’(for local shear failure)=tan−1 (2⁄3 tan )
 c’(for local shear failure)=2/3c
Equations for the various types of footings for (c -) soil under general shear failure have been
given earlier.

Soil Mechanics-II Page 10

Debre Markos University, Civil Engineering A/P 2021/22

For an undrained condition with 𝜙 ′ = 0 and 𝜏𝑓 = 𝑐𝑢 , the bearing-capacity factors are and Nγ = 0
and Nq = 1. Nc = 5.7. In that case,
qu = 5.7𝑐𝑢 + Df (Strip footing)
qu = (1.3)5.7𝑐𝑢 + Df = 7.41𝑐𝑢 + 𝑞 (Square and circular footing)
𝐵
qu = 5.7𝑐𝑢 (1 + 0.3 ( 𝐿 )) + γDf (Rectangular footing)
Note that: Similar types of equations as presented for general shear failure can be developed for
local shear failure also.
3.3.2. Meyerhof’s Bearing Capacity equation

Meyerhof (1951) developed a bearing capacity equation by extending Terzhagi’s failure

mechanism and taking into account the effects of footing shape, load inclination and footing depth.
For a rectangular footing of L by B (L > B) and inclined load:

qu = c ′ Nc Sc ic dc + Df γNq Sq iq dq + 0.5BγNγ Sγ iγ dγ

The above equation is also called general bearing capacity equation.

Sc , Sq , Sγ = shape factors

ic , iq , iγ = load inclination factors

dc , dq , dγ = depth factors

Nc , Nq , Nγ = bearing capacity factors


Nq = tan2 (45 + ⁄2)etan′
Nc = (Nq − 1)cot′
N = 2(Nq + 1)tan′
N = (Nq − 1)tan(1.4ϕ′) (Meyerhof (1963))

For vertical load, ic = iq = iγ = 1

qu = c ′ Nc Sc dc + Df γNq Sq dq + 0.5BγNγ Sγ dγ

Soil Mechanics-II Page 11

Debre Markos University, Civil Engineering A/P 2021/22

Table 3.2 Bearing-Capacity Factors Nc , Nq 𝑎𝑛𝑑 Nγ

For undrained Conditions, 𝑐𝑢 , 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝜙 = 0;

Nc = 5.14, Nq = 1 𝑎𝑛𝑑 Nγ = 0

𝑞𝑢 = 5.14𝑐𝑢 + 𝑞 and

Net ultimate bearing capacity, 𝑞𝑢(𝑛𝑒𝑡) is

𝑞𝑢(𝑛𝑒𝑡) = 𝑞𝑢 − 𝑞 = 5.14𝑐𝑢

Soil Mechanics-II Page 12

Debre Markos University, Civil Engineering A/P 2021/22

Table 3.3 Meyerhof’s shape, inclination and depth factors

Factors Relationships
Shape
For 𝝓′ = 𝟎
sc 1 + 0.2(B⁄L)
sq = sγ 1.0

For 𝝓′ ≥ 𝟏𝟎𝟎
sc 1 + 0.2(B⁄L)tan2 (45 + ϕ′⁄2)
sq = sγ 1 + 0.1(B⁄L)tan2 (45 + ϕ′⁄2)
Depth
For 𝝓′ = 𝟎
dc 1 + 0.2(Df ⁄B)
dq = dγ 1.0

For 𝝓′ ≥ 𝟏𝟎𝟎
dc 1 + 0.2(Df ⁄B)tan2 (45 + ϕ′⁄2)
dq = dγ 1 + 0.1(Df ⁄B)tan2 (45 + ϕ′⁄2)
Inclination
2
ic = iq α0
(1 − 0 )
90
2
α0
(1 − )
iγ ϕ′
α = inclination of the resultant load on the foundation measured from vertical 𝑎𝑥𝑖𝑠

3.3.3. Hansen’s Bearing Capacity Equation

Hansen (1961) extended Meyerhof’s solutions by considering the effects of sloping ground surface
and tilted base (Fig. 3.13) as well as modification of 𝑁 and other factors. For a rectangular footing
of L by B (L > B) and inclined ground surface, base and load:

The above equation is sometimes referred to as the general bearing capacity equation. In the special
case of a horizontal ground surface the equation becomes;

Soil Mechanics-II Page 13

Debre Markos University, Civil Engineering A/P 2021/22

Figure 3.13 Identification of items in Hansen’s bearing capacity equation.


Nq = tan2 (45 + ⁄2)etan , Nc = (Nq − 1)cot, N = 1.5(Nq − 1)tan 
Since failure can take place either along the long side or along the short side, Hansen proposed
two sets of shape, inclination and depth factors.
The shape factors are:

Where the suffix i in the above equation stands for B or L. 2 ≤ 𝛼1 = 𝛼2 ≤ 5. A is the area of the
footing base and 𝑐𝑏 is the cohesion mobilized in the footing-soil contact area. For the tilted base:

In the above equations, B and L may be replaced by their effective values (B’ and L’) expressed
by the following equation.
The depth factors are expressed in two sets:

Soil Mechanics-II Page 14

Debre Markos University, Civil Engineering A/P 2021/22

Df⁄ Df
For B ≤ 1 and ⁄L ≤ 1:

For the sloping ground and tilted base, the ground factors 𝐠 𝐢 and base factors 𝐛𝐢 are proposed by
the following equations. The angles β and  are at the same plane, either parallel to B or L.

A comparative summary of the three bearing capacity equations

Terzaghi’s equations were and are still widely used, perhaps because they are somewhat simpler
than Meyerhof’s and Hansen’s. Practitioners use Terzaghi’s equations for a very cohesive soil and
D/B < 1. However, Terzaghi’s equations have the following major drawbacks:
 Shape, depth and inclination factors are not considered.
 Terzaghi’s equations are suitable for a concentrically loaded horizontal footing but are not
suitable for eccentrically (for example, columns with moment or titled forces) loaded
footings that are very common in practice.
 The equations are generally conservative than Meyerhof’s and Hansen’s.

Soil Mechanics-II Page 15

Debre Markos University, Civil Engineering A/P 2021/22

Currently, Meyerhof’s and Hansen’s equations are more widely used than Terzaghi’s. Both are
viewed as somewhat less conservative and applicable to more general conditions. Hansen’s is,
however, used when the base is tilted or when the footing is on a slope and for D/B > 1.

3.4. Effect of Water Table on Bearing Capacity

Water table affects the bearing capacity through changing the effective unit weight of the soil.
The theoretical equations developed for computing the ultimate bearing capacity 𝐪𝐮 of soil are
based on the assumption that the water table lies at a depth below the base of the foundation equal
to or greater than the width B of the foundation or otherwise the depth of the water table from
ground surface is equal to or greater than (Df + B). In case the water table lies at any intermediate
depth less than the depth (Df + B), the bearing capacity equations are affected due to the presence
of the water table.

Case 1.When the water table lies above the base of the foundation (fig. 3.14a).
In this case the terms 1⁄2 BN and Df Nq or (qNq ) will get affected. The magnitude of q in the
second term of bearing capacity equation should be calculated as
q = (Df − D) + ′ D
Where; ′ = sat − w = effective unit weight of soil. The bearing capacity equation will be
written as follows in this case,

1
qu = cNc + [(Df − D) + ′ D]Nq + ′BN
2

Figure 3.14 Effect of GWT on bearing capacity

Soil Mechanics-II Page 16
Debre Markos University, Civil Engineering A/P 2021/22

Case-2: When the ground water table coincides with the bottom/ level of foundation (fig.
3.14b)
1
q = Df . However the third term will be 2 ′BN .

1
→ qu = cNc + Df Nq + ′BN
2
Case 3: When the water table lies within depth B below the base of the foundation (fig.3.14c).
In this case only the term 1⁄2 BN will get affected.
1
avg = [D + ′(B − D)] (for D ≤ B)
B

qu = cNc + Df Nq + 1⁄2 avg BN

Case 4: when the depth of ground water table is at a depth greater or equal to width, B of
the footing below the base of the footing, it doesn’t affect bearing capacity of soil.
avg =  (for D > B)
Therefore,
qu = cNc + Df Nq + 1⁄2 BN
3.5.Allowable bearing capacity and factor of safety
The allowable bearing capacity, qall is calculated by dividing the ultimate bearing capacity by a
factor, called the factor of safety, FS. The FS is intended to compensate for assumptions made in
developing the bearing capacity equations, soil variability, inaccurate soil data, and uncertainties
of loads. The magnitude of FS applied to the ultimate bearing capacity may be between 2 and 3.
The allowable bearing capacity is:
qu
qall =
Fs
Alternatively, if the maximum applied foundation stress, σmax is known and the dimension of the
footing is also known then you can find a factor of safety by replacing 𝑞𝑎𝑙𝑙 by σmax in the above
equation.

qu
Fs =
σmax

3.6. Bearing Capacity for Eccentrically Loaded Footings

Meyerhof (1963) proposed an approximate method for loads that are located off-centered (or
eccentric loads).
When a footing is eccentrically loaded in such a way that it will loose contact from the soil on
one side, then the area that has lost thee contact can be neglected and worked out. Hence an area

Soil Mechanics-II Page 17

Debre Markos University, Civil Engineering A/P 2021/22

having the point of application of load as center of gravity (CG) will be taken as effective area of
footing which will be safer and analytically worked out easily.

Figure 3.15 Eccentrically loaded footing (Meyerhof, 1953)

He proposed that for a rectangular footing of width B and length L, the base area should be
modified with the following dimensions:
B’ = B – 2𝑒𝐵 and L’ =L – 2𝑒𝐿
Note: eB =ex and eL =ey
Where B’ and L’ are the modified width and length, 𝑒𝐵 and 𝑒𝐿 are the eccentricities in the
directions of the width and length, respectively.

Figure 3.16. Two-way eccentricities

From your course in mechanics you should recall that

Soil Mechanics-II Page 18

Debre Markos University, Civil Engineering A/P 2021/22

My Mx
eB = and eL =
P P

Figure 3.17 eccentrically loaded footing in the two directions

Where; Mx = P × eL =moment about x-x axis

My = P × eB =moment about y-y axis

Then the maximum and minimum vertical stresses along the x axis are:
P 6eB P 6eB
max = (1 + ) and min = (1 − )
BL B BL B

and along the y axis are:

P 6eL P 6eL
max = (1 + ) and min = (1 − )
BL B BL B
A = area of footing

P = Total vertical load on the footing column

Since the tensile strength of soils is approximately zero, 𝑞𝑚𝑖𝑛 should always be greater than zero.
Therefore, eB & eL should always be less than B⁄6 & L⁄6 respectively.

3.7. Field Tests

Often, it is difficult to obtain undisturbed samples of especially coarse-grained soils for laboratory
testing and one has to use results from field tests to determine the bearing capacity of shallow
foundations. Some of the most common methods used for field tests are briefly described below.

3.7.1 Plate Loading Test

A plate load test helps us in determining the ultimate bearing capacity, as well as the probable
settlement of the soil for the given loading and depth. It is a sort of model test performed on the

Soil Mechanics-II Page 19

Debre Markos University, Civil Engineering A/P 2021/22

building site on a loading plate kept in an excavation in a ground at a depth equal to depth of
proposed footing. The test set up is shown in figure.

The test procedure is as follows:

The load is applied in increments and settlements are observed. The load increments are either 1/5
of the estimated safe bearing capacity or 1/10 of ultimate bearing capacity subjected to a maximum
of 100KN. Each load increment is sustained until such time the rate of settlement reduces to
0.02mm/hr. a plot of settlement vs load is done from which ultimate bearing capacity can be
determined.

Figure 3.18 Plate Loading Test

Effect of Size of Plate on Settlement

Because of the size effect under the same pressure, different footings and plates of different sizes
undergo different settlements. Various relations have been proposed find the settlements of
footings from the plate load test results under same pressure.

Where; Sp and Sf are the settlement of plate and footing respectively.

Soil Mechanics-II Page 20

Debre Markos University, Civil Engineering A/P 2021/22

Bp and Bf are width of the plate and footing respectively.

Effect of Size of Plate on Bearing Capacity

It is noticed that bearing capacity of sands and gravels increases with size of footing. It can also
noticed from the bearing capacity equation as well. Some relation relating bearing capacity of plate
and footing are as follows:

B
 For sands; qf = qp ( f⁄B )
p
Where; qf and qp are bearing capacity of foundation and plate and
BP and Bf are width of the plate and footing respectively.
 For clayey soils bearing capacity is almost independent of the size of footing.

 For c- soils: Housel suggested the following expression to find the load carried by the
footing.
Q = Aq + Ps

Where; Q is the total load on footing, A is the contact area of footing or plate, p is perimeter of
footing or plate, s is perimeter shear a constant for a given soil, q is bearing pressure beneath the
area A, a constant. If tests are carried on two different size plates, from the results one can obtain
q and s, and can be used obtaining load carried by other footings.

Q1 = A1 q + P1 S

Q 2 = A2 q + P2 𝑆

Then q and s are solved from these equations simultaneously.

3.7.2 Bearing Capacity from Standard Penetration Test

Penetration tests are those in which the resistance to penetration of a soil for standard value of
penetration is determined in a standard or specified manner. Devices known as penetrometers are
used for this purpose. A wide variety of these tests has become available but the more important
are the standard penetration test. This is more commonly employed for cohesionless soil. More
detailed information on this device and test will be provided in foundation course at “soil
exploration”.

At this stage, it is sufficient to know that the standard penetration test results are commonly used
in the form of ‘penetration number’ N, which indicates the number of blows required to cause
25mm penetration of split-spoon sampler in to the soil under test by means of a 65Kg hammer
falling through 760mm.

Soil Mechanics-II Page 21

Debre Markos University, Civil Engineering A/P 2021/22

Where; 𝑘𝑑 = 1 + 0.33 𝐷𝑓 ⁄𝐵 ≤ 1.33, N is corrected statistical average value for footing influence
zone of about 0.5𝐷𝑓 above footing base to at least 2B below.

3.7.3 Cone Penetration Test

In Europe the test is done routinely done in soil investigation programme. The cone resistance to
bearing capacities is developed as follows.
qc
qa = for B ≤ F4
30
q c B + F3
qa = ( ) for B > F4
50 B

Where; 𝑞𝑎 is the allowable bearing pressure for 25mm settlement.

𝑞𝑐 is the resistance to cone penetration alone in Kpa.

qc = Q⁄A , 𝐴𝑐 = cone area = DL

c

Figure 3.19 Cone Penetration Test

Soil Mechanics-II Page 22