Foundation & Geotechnical Engineering

CE-430 (2 Credit Hours)

Geotechnical and Foundation Engineering
6th Semester (Spring 2021)

Ch-3: Lec-6
Foundation Settlements: Immediate Settlement
Instructor:

Dr Irshad Ahmad

Department of Civil Engineering

University of Engineering and Technology, Peshawar
1
 Contents

➢ Foundation Settlement- Introduction

➢ Some Typical Loads on Building Foundations
➢ Number and Depth of boring
➢ Immediate settlement calculations using Theory of Elasticity
➢ SPT Procedure
➢ SPT corrections
➢ SPT correlations
➢ Immediate settlement using SPT
 Foundation Settlement
▪ A soil shear Failure can result in excessive building distortion and even
collapse. Excessive settlement can result in structural damage to a building
frame nuisances such as sticking doors and windows, cracks in tile and
plaster, and excessive wear or equipment failure from misalignment
resulting from foundation Settlements.
▪ It is necessary to investigate both base shear resistance (Ultimate Bearing
Capacity) and settlement for any structure.
▪ In many cases settlement criteria will control the allowable bearing
capacity.
▪ Except for occasional coincidence, soil settlement computations are only
best estimates of the deformation to expect when a load is applied.
▪ A small computed H of 10 mm, where the measured value is 5 mm or 20
mm has a large error, but most practical structure can tolerate either to
predicted or measured values. What we do not want is an estimate of 25
mm and a subsequent settlement of 100 mm.
▪ Two Major problems with soil settlement analysis
(1) Obtaining reliable values of the ”elastic” parameters
(2) Obtaining a reliable stress profile from the applied load.

3
 Foundation Settlement
The components of Foundation Settlements are
(1) Immediate Settlement
(2) Consolidation Settlement
(3) Secondary Compression (creep)

Settlement at any time “t” is

H(t)= Hi + UHc + Hs
When U=1 (i.e. 100% consolidation) then;
H(final)= Hi + Hc + Hs

H =Total Settlement,
Hc= Consolidation settlement,
Hs= Secondary compression,
U=average degree of consolidation.

4
 Settlements
Immediate Settlement (Hi)

▪ Immediate settlements takes place as the load is applied or within a time

period of about 7 days.
▪ Predominates in
▪ (Saturated or unsaturated) cohesionless soils (Sand/gravels which
have large permeability)
▪ and unsaturated clays/silts.
▪ Immediate settlement analyses are used for
(1) all fine-grained soils including silts and clays with a degree of
saturation <90%
(2) for all coarse-grained soils (sand, gravels) with large coefficient of
permeability (say above 10-3 m/s).

5
 Settlements
Consolidation Settlements (Hc)

▪ Consolidation settlements are time dependent and take months to years to

develop. The leaning tower of Pisa in Italy has been undergoing
consolidation settlement for over 700 years. The lean is caused by
consolidation settlement being greater on one side. This, however, is an
extreme case, the principle settlements for most projects occurring in 3 to
10 years.
▪ Predominates in saturated/nearly saturated fine grained soils where
consolidation theory applies.
▪ Here we are interested to estimate both consolidation settlement and how
long a time it will take for most of the settlement to occur.

Secondary Compression/Creep (Hs)

▪ Occurs due to rearrangement of clay particles into a more stable

configuration under constant effective stress
▪ Predominates in highly plastic clays and organic clays.
Number of borings
Depth of borings
 STRIP FOOTING SQUARE FOOTING
Depth of boring

➢For Strip footing:

➢10% qo at 6.5B
➢For Square footing
➢10% qo at 2B
➢For circular footing
➢10% qo at 2  Dia
 Immediate Settlement
➢ We will find immediate settlement through
➢ THEORY OF ELASTICITY
➢ USING STANDARD PENETRATION TEST RESULTS
 Immediate Settlement- Theory Of Elasticity
The settlement of the corner of a rectangular base of dimensions BL on the surface of an elastic half-
space can be computed from an equation from the theory of elasticity [e.g., Timoshenko and Goodier
(1951)] as follows:
1 − µ2
𝐻𝑖 = 𝑞𝑜 𝐵 𝑚𝐼
𝐸𝑠

Where qo = intensity of contact pressure in units of Es

B= least lateral dimension of contributing base area in units of Hi
Es,  = elastic soil parameters.
m = number of corners contributing to settlement Hi. At the footing center m=4; and at a corner m=1, at
a side m=2.

B=B , L=L , m=1 corner B=B/2 , L=L , m=2 , Edge B=B/2 , L=L/2 , m=4 , Center
B=B/2
 Immediate Settlement- Theory Of Elasticity
H=stratum depth that actually causes settlement, minimum of the following

B B
GL GL

H
5B

5B

H= minimum of
Depth to where a hard stratum is encountered. Take “hard” as that
where Es in the hard layer is about 10Es of the adjacent upper layer.

12
 Immediate Settlement-(Layered Soil)

Take weighed average of Es in the depth H i.e.

B
GL
𝐸1 𝑧1 + 𝐸2 𝑧2 + ⋯ … … + 𝐸𝑛 𝑧𝑛
𝐸𝑎𝑣 =
𝑧1 + 𝑧2 +, … … . . +𝑧𝑛 z1 E1

z2 E2
H

z3 E3

13
 Shape and Rigidity factor “I”

I=shape and rigidity

factor(dimensionless). This factor is
derived from theory of elasticity to
account for the thickness of the soil
layer, shape of the foundation, and
flexibility of the foundation.
Theoretical values of I can be
obtained for various situations as
 Example-Using Weighted Average of Es
Find Settlement under the center of Footing below?

Using Weighted Average

𝐸1 𝑧1 + 𝐸2 𝑧2
𝐸𝑎𝑣 =
𝑧1 + 𝑧2

42.53 + 608
𝐸𝑎𝑣 = = 55 𝑀𝑃𝑎
3+8
𝐵 33.5
𝐻 = 11 𝑚 , 𝐵 = = = 16.75 𝑚
2 2

𝐻 11
= = 0.66 𝑢𝑠𝑒 0.7
𝐵 16.75

39.5 1 − µ2
𝐿 𝐻 = 𝑞𝑜 𝐵 𝑚𝐼
= 2 = 1.18 𝐸𝑠
𝐵 33.5
2
1 − 0.332
𝐻 = 13416.75 40.128
Assume , µ=0.33 551000

I= 0.128 (after interpolation) 𝐻 = 0.0175 𝑚

𝐻 = 0.01751000 = 17.5 𝑚𝑚
 L
L L
𝐻/𝐵 =1 = 1.18 =2
B B B

0.5 0.09 .08

0.7 0.13 0.128 0.12

1 0.19 0.18

(1,0.19)
y

(0.7,y)

(0.5,0.09)

𝑥 − 𝑥1 𝑦2 − 𝑦1
=
𝑦 − 𝑦1 𝑥2 − 𝑥1
16
Standard Penetration Test (ASTM D-1586)

Rope
Tripod
Hammer

Guiding Rod

Anvil

Boring rod

17
 Standard Penetration Test (ASTM D-1586)
➢ Practicing Engineers use the SPT widely in estimating the bearing capacity of
soils and to assess the in-situ relative density of a sand deposit.
➢ The test is performed using a split spoon barrel sampler 50mm external
diameter, 34.93 mm internal diameter and about 650mm in length and
connected to the end of boring rods.
➢ After boring has been advanced to the desired sampling elevation and
excessive cutting has been removed, attach the split spoon sampler to the
sampling rods and lover into borehole.
➢ Drive the sample with blows from 140lb (63.5 kg) hammer falling freely
through a height of 760mm (30 inch).
➢ The sampler is advanced under the impact of the hammer into three successive
(6 inch) increments. (i.e. total 18 inch).

18
 Standard Penetration Test (ASTM D-1586)
➢ Count the number of blows in each 6 inch increment until one of the
following occurs
➢ A total of 50 blows have been applied during any of the three 6
inch increments.
➢ A total of 100 blows have been applied
➢ There is no observed advance of the sampler during the
application of 10 successive blows of the hammer.
➢ The sampler is advanced the complete 18 inch without the
limiting blow counts occurring as describe in 1,2 and 3.
➢ The 1st 6 inch is considered to be a seating drive. The sum of the
number of blows required for the 2nd and 3rd 6-inch penetration is
termed the standard penetration resistance or the N-value.
19
Split spoon sampler
Disturbance caused by Split spoon sampler
 Disturbance caused by Standard Split spoon sampler

For standard split spoon sampler;

𝐷𝑜 = 50.8 𝑚𝑚
𝐷𝑖 = 34.93 mm

𝐷𝑜2 − 𝐷𝑖2
𝐴𝑅 % = 100
𝐷𝑖2

50.82 − 34.932
𝐴𝑅 % = 2
100 = 111.5%
34.93
Hence, these samples are highly disturbed. Split-spoon samples
generally are taken at intervals of about 1.5 m. When the material
encountered in the field is sand (particularly fine sand below the water
table), recovery of the sample by a split-spoon sampler may be
difficult). In that case, a devise such as a spring core catcher may
have to be placed inside the spilt spoon.
Thin wall tube sampler (Shelby tubes)

For Shelby tube sampler;

𝐷𝑜 = 50.8 𝑚𝑚
𝐷𝑖 = 47.63 mm

𝐷𝑜2 − 𝐷𝑖2
𝐴𝑅 % = 100
𝐷𝑖2

50.82 − 47.632
𝐴𝑅 % = 100 = 13.75%
47.632
Hammers
 Hammer Efficiency
SPT Hammer Efficiency

𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 ℎ𝑎𝑚𝑚𝑎𝑒𝑟 𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑔𝑦 𝑡𝑜 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑠𝑎𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑒𝑟

ƞ𝐻 % = 100
𝑇ℎ𝑒𝑜𝑟𝑒𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝑖𝑛𝑝𝑢𝑡 𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑔𝑦

𝑇ℎ𝑒𝑜𝑟𝑒𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝑖𝑛𝑝𝑢𝑡 𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑔𝑦 = 𝑊ℎ

𝑊ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒
𝑊 = 𝑤𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 ℎ𝑎𝑚𝑚𝑒𝑟 0.623 𝑘𝑁 (140 𝑙𝑏)
ℎ = ℎ𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑑𝑟𝑜𝑝 0.76 𝑚 (30 𝑖𝑛)

𝑆𝑜,
𝑊ℎ = 0.6230.76 = 0.474 𝑘𝑁 − 𝑚 (4200 𝑖𝑛 − 𝑙𝑏)

Note : For any soil, hammer energy efficiency ƞH multiplied by blow count N is
constant.
 Example

Hammer efficiency of First equipment , ƞH1 =60%

Blow count for first equipment, N60 =12
Hammer efficiency of 2nd equipment , ƞH2 =70%
Find N70 for 2nd equipment in same soil=?

As we know
𝐹𝑜𝑟 𝑎𝑛𝑦 𝑠𝑜𝑖𝑙, ℎ𝑎𝑚𝑚𝑒𝑟 𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑔𝑦 𝑒𝑓𝑓𝑖𝑐𝑖𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑦 𝑚𝑢𝑙𝑡𝑖𝑝𝑙𝑖𝑒𝑑 𝑏𝑦 𝑏𝑙𝑜𝑤 𝑐𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑡 𝑁 𝑖𝑠 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑡
So,
ƞ𝐻(2) 𝑁70 = ƞ𝐻(1) 𝑁60

ƞ𝐻 1
𝑁70 = 𝑁60
ƞ𝐻 2

60
𝑁70 = 12 = 10.2  11
70

26
 Corrected N- value
In the field, the magnitude of ƞH can vary from 30 to 90%. The standard practice
now in the U.S. is to express the N-value to an average energy ratio of 60% (  N60).
Thus, correcting for field procedures and on the basis of field observations, it appears
reasonable to standardize the field penetration number as a function of the input
driving energy and its dissipation around the sampler into the surrounding soil, or

𝑁 ƞ𝐻
𝑁60 =
60

𝑁 ƞ𝐻 ƞ𝐵 ƞ𝑆 ƞ𝑅
𝑁60 =
60

Where

N60 = standard penetration number, corrected for field conditions

N = measured penetration number

ƞH = hammer efficiency (%)

ƞB = correction for borehole diameter

ƞS = sampler correction

ƞR = correction for rod length

N-value corrections
 N-value corrections (Overburden)
In granular soils, the value of N is affected by the effective overburden
pressure, o. For that reason, the value of N60 obtained from field exploration
under different effective overburden pressures should be changed to
correspond to a standard value of o. That is,

𝑁1(60) = 𝐶𝑁 𝑁60
Where

(N1)60 = value of N60 corrected to a standard value of o [100 kPa (2000 lb/ft2)]

CN = correction factor

N60 = value of N obtained form field exploration.

𝟐𝟎𝟎𝟎
𝑪𝑵 = o in psf
𝒐

𝟏𝟎𝟎
𝑪𝑵 = o in kPa
𝒐
SPT Correlations for Relative Density (Dr) & Friction angle ()
SPT Correlations
 SPT Correlations

➢ Undrained shear strength cu(kN/m2) = 29 (N60)0.72 [Hara, et al. 1971]

 Immediate Settlement: SPT
𝑵𝟔𝟎 𝑯𝒊 N60
𝒒𝒂 = 𝑲𝒅  For B  F4
𝑭𝟏 𝑯𝒐
SI Fps
25 mm or 1 inch

F1 0.05 2.5
𝑵𝟔𝟎 𝑩+𝑭𝟑 𝟐 𝑯𝒊 F2 0.08 4
𝒒𝒂 =  𝑲𝒅  For B > F4
𝑭𝟐 𝑩 𝑯𝒐 F3 0.3 1
F4 1.2 4

𝐷
𝐾𝑑 = 1 + 0.33  1.33 [𝑎𝑠 𝑠𝑢𝑔𝑔𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑏𝑦 𝑀𝑎𝑦𝑒𝑟ℎ𝑜𝑓 1965 ]
𝐵

𝑞𝑎 = 𝑛𝑒𝑡 𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑜𝑤𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 𝑏𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑯𝒐 = 25 𝑚𝑚 𝑜𝑟 1 𝑖𝑛𝑐ℎ 𝑠𝑒𝑡𝑡𝑙𝑒𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡

 Design N Values

GL

0.5B

2B
𝑁
𝑁𝑎𝑣 =
𝑛

(3 + 7 + 12 + 16 + 13 + 12)
𝑁𝑎𝑣 =
7
𝑁𝑎𝑣 =9
 z1
N1 𝑁1 𝑧1 + 𝑁2 𝑧2 + 𝑁3 𝑧3
𝑁𝑎𝑣 =
𝑧1 + 𝑧2 + 𝑧3
z2
N2

z3
N3

36
 Problem
The average N60 blow count =7 in the effective zone for a footing located at D=1.6 m
(blow count average in range from 1 to 4 m depth), find allowable bearing capacity for
a 40 mm settlement? Present data as a curve of qa versus B.

When B=1.5 m
0
𝐷
𝐾𝑑 = 1 + 0.33  1.33 D=1.6 m
𝐵 1

1.6
𝐾𝑑 = 1 + 0.33 = 1.352 B
1.5
𝐾𝑑 = 1.33
As B(1.6) > F4 (1.2) , So, Nav =7

𝟐
𝑵𝟔𝟎 𝑩 + 𝑭𝟑 𝑯𝒊 4
𝒒𝒂 =  𝑲𝒅 
𝑭𝟐 𝑩 𝑯𝒐
𝟐
𝒒𝒂 =
𝟕

𝟏. 𝟓 + 𝟎. 𝟑
𝟏. 𝟑𝟑
𝟒𝟎
= 𝟐𝟔𝟖. 𝟏𝟐𝟖 𝒌𝑷𝒂
N60
𝟎. 𝟎𝟖 𝟏. 𝟓 𝟐𝟓

SI Fps
When B=2 m

1.6 F1 0.05 2.5

𝐾𝑑 = 1 + 0.33 = 1.264
2
F2 0.08 4
𝟐
𝟕 𝟐 + 𝟎. 𝟑 𝟒𝟎 F3 0.3 1
𝒒𝒂 =  𝟏. 𝟐𝟔𝟒 = 𝟐𝟑𝟒. 𝟎𝟑 𝒌𝑷𝒂
𝟎. 𝟎𝟖 𝟐 𝟐𝟓
F4 1.2 4
 PROBLEM

N60 within depth of 10 m;

3 + 7 + 12 + 12 + 16
𝑁60 = = 10
5
 PROBLEM
Given Data
Qapp=102,000 kg=(102,0009.81)/1000  1000 kN
D=1.5 m
Hi=25 mm
N60 =10 N60
Solution
SI Fps
Assume B=2

𝐷 F1 0.05 2.5
𝐾𝑑 = 1 + 0.33  1.33
𝐵 F2 0.08 4
1.5 F3 0.3 1
𝐾𝑑 = 1 + 0.33 = 1.2475
1.5
F4 1.2 4
As B(1.5) > F4 (1.2) , So,

𝟐
𝑵𝟔𝟎 𝑩 + 𝑭𝟑 𝑯𝒊
𝒒𝒂 =  𝑲𝒅 
𝑭𝟐 𝑩 𝑯𝒐

𝟐
𝟏𝟎 𝟐 + 𝟎. 𝟑 𝟐𝟓
𝒒𝒂 =  𝟏. 𝟐𝟒𝟕𝟓 = 𝟐𝟎𝟔. 𝟑 𝒌𝑷𝒂
𝟎. 𝟎𝟖 𝟐 𝟐𝟓

𝑸𝒂 = 𝒒𝒂 𝑩𝟐

𝑸𝒂 = 𝟐𝟎𝟔. 𝟑𝟐𝟐 = 𝟖𝟐𝟓. 𝟐 𝒌𝑵 40

 Example (Bowels P-543)
➢Find allowable BC qa to ensure
➢FOS=3 against Shear failure
➢ Si <= 50 m

Solution:
(1) Shear Criteria:
qu = c Nc sc +  D Nq + ½  B N s
BC factors: For ⱷ = 0, Nc = 5.14, Nq = 1 and
N = 0
Shape factors: sc=1.3, and s=0.8
qu (net)= qu(gross) - D =
(1505.14 1.3 + 18.7  1.5 1) - 18.7  1.5
= 1000 kPa
qsafe = qu/FOS = 334 kN/m2

42
 Example
➢Find allowable BC qa to ensure
➢FOS=3 against Shear failure
➢ Si <= 50 m
Solution: (shear Criteria)
𝟏
𝒒𝒖 = 𝒄𝑵𝒄 𝒔𝒄 + 𝑫𝑵𝒒 + 𝑩𝑵 𝒔
𝟐

BC factors for =0

𝑁𝑐 = 5.14 , 𝑁𝑞 = 1 , 𝑁 = 0
Shape Factors: sc=1.3 , s=0.8
c=qu(av)/2=300/2=150 kPa

𝑞𝑢(𝑛𝑒𝑡) = 𝑞𝑢(𝑔𝑟𝑜𝑠𝑠) − 𝐷

𝑞𝑢(𝑛𝑒𝑡) = (1505.141.3 + 18.71.51 + 0) − (18.71.5)

𝑞𝑢(𝑛𝑒𝑡) = 1000 𝑘𝑃𝑎

𝑞𝑢(𝑛𝑒𝑡)
𝑞𝑠𝑎𝑓𝑒 =
𝐹𝑂𝑆

1000
𝑞𝑠𝑎𝑓𝑒 = = 334 𝑘𝑃𝑎 43
3
Settlement Criteria 1503.4 + 18.953.3 + 227 + 32.913.8
𝐸𝑎𝑣 =
27.5

𝐸𝑎𝑣 = 42.93 𝑀𝑃𝑎

ℎ = 4.9 − 1.5 + 3.3 + 7 + 13.8 = 27.5 𝑚

Es1= 1000 cu = 1000(300/2)=150 000 kPa
Assume B=14 m

𝐵 14
𝐵 = = =7𝑚
Es2= 500(N55+15)= 500[18(70/55)+15]=18950 kPa 2 2

𝐻 27.5 𝐿
= 4 𝑚 , 𝐵 = 1
𝐵 7

For µ=0.33 , I=0.42 (after interpolation)

Es2= 500(N55+15)= 500[22(70/55)+15]=22 000 kPa
1 − 0.332
0.5 = 𝑞𝑜 7 40.42
42.93

𝑞𝑜 = 204 𝑘𝑃𝑎

Allowable Bearing Capacity:

Es2= 500(N55+15)= 500[40(70/55)+15]=32 900 kPa
qa=200 kPa, settlement controls:
As the design proceeds and B is found to
be substantially different from 14m, it
may be necessary to revise qa.
44
 Design Curve

qa

45