Alphan, I., 1967. The empirical evaluation of the coefficient K0 and KQR. Jap. Soc. Soil
Mech. Found. Eng., Soil and Found., Vol. 7, No. 1, 3140.
American Concrete Pipe Association, ACPA, 1988. Concrete pipe handbook. ISBN 090
386816, Vienna, USA.
Bergado, D. T., Chai, C. T., Alfaro, M. C. & Balasubramaniam, A. S., 1992. Improvement
techniques of soft ground in subsiding and lowland environment. Asian Inst, of Technology,
Bangkok.
Berggren, B., 1981. Grvplar p friktionsjordsttningar och brfrmaga (Bored piles
on noncohesive soilssettlement and bearing capacity). Ph. D. Thesis, Chalmers
University of Technology, Gothenburg.
Bustamante, M. G. & Gianeselli, L., 1981. Readjustment des paramtres des calculs des
pieux. Proc. 10th Int. Conf. Soil Mech. Found. Eng., Vol. 2, 643646.
Cambefort, H., 1967. Injection des sols. Eyrolles, Vol. 1 and 2.
Chambosse, G. & Dobson, T., 1982. Stone columns IEstimation of bearing capacity and
expected settlement in cohesive soils. GKN Keller Inc., Tampa, Florida.
Caquot, ., Kerisel, J. & Absi, F., 1973. Tables de bute et de pousse. GauthierVillars,
ParisBruxellesMontral.
Donchev, P., 1980. Compaction of loess by saturation and explosion. Int. Conf. on Com
paction, Paris, Vol 1,313317.
Esrig, M. J., 1968. Pore pressures, consolidation, and electrokinetics. Proc. ASCE, J. Soil
Mech. Found. Eng., Vol. 94, SM 4.
Hansbo, S., 1962. Ny konapparat fr bestmning av lerors skrhallfasthet. (A new cone
apparatus for determination of the shear strength of clays). Byggmstaren No. 10, 215
220.
Hansbo, S., Hofmann, E. & Mosesson, J., 1973. stra Nordstaden, Gothenburg. Experiences
concerning a difficult foundation problem and its unorthodox solution. Proc. 8th Int.
Conf. Soil Mech. Found. Eng., Moscow, Vol. 2.2, 105110.
Hansbo, S. & Jendeby, L., 1983. A case study of two alternative foundation principles:
conventional friction piling and creep piling. Vag och Vattenbyggarcn, No.78,2931.
Hansbo, S. & Kllstrm, R., 1983. Creep pilesa costeffective alternative to conventional
friction piles. Vg och vattenbyggaren No. 78, 2327.
Hansbo, S., Pramborg, B. & Nordin, P. O., 1977. The Vnern terminal. Illustrative example
of dynamic consolidation of hydraulically placed fill of organic silt and sand. Sols Soils,
No. 25,511.
Hardin, B. O. & Black, W. L., 1969. Vibration modulus of normally consolidated clay.
(Closure). Proc. ASCE, J. Soil Mech. Found. Div., Vol. 95, No. SM 6, 15311537.
Hardin, B. O. & Richart, F. E. Jr., 1963. Elastic wave velocities in granular soils. Proc.
ASCE, J. Soil Mech. Found. Div., Vol. 89, No. SM 1, 3565.
Jamiolkowski, M., Ladd, C. C , Germaine, J. T. & Lancelotta, R., 1985. New developments
in field and laboratory testing of soils. Proc. 11th Int. Conf. Soil Mech. Found. Eng., San
Francisco, Vol 1, 57154.
Janbu, ., 1965. Consolidation of clay layers based on nonlinear stressstrain. Proc. 6th
Int. Conf. Soil Mech. Found. Eng., Montreal, Vol. 2, 8387.
Karol, R. H., 1960. Field tests for evaluating the effectiveness of a grouting operation. Am.
Cyan. Co Expl. and Min. Chem. Dep.
Larsson, R., 1975. Konsolidering av lera med elektroosmos. (Consolidation of clay by
means of electroosmosis). Byggforskningen R45: 1975.
Larsson, R., 1977. Basic behaviour of Scandinavian soft clays. Swedish Geotech. Institute,
Report No. 4.
Liedberg, S., 1991. Earth pressure distribution against rigid pipes under various bedding
conditions. Ph. D. Thesis, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg.
Littlejohn, G. S., 1992. Chemical grouting. In: M. P. Moseley (Editor), Ground improve
ment, Blackie Academic & Professional, CRC Press, Inc., 100129.
Maag, E., 1938.ber die Verfestigung und Dichtung des Baugrundes (Injektionen).
Erdbautechnik, .
Mesri, G. & Godlewski, P. M.,1977. Time and stresscompressibility interrelationship.
ASCE, J. Geotech. Eng. Div., GT 5, 417430.
Olander, H. C , 1950. Stress analysis of concrete pipe. US Bureau Reel. Eng. Monographs,
No. 6.
Pramborg, B. & Albertsson, B., 1992. Underskning av kalk/cementpelare. (Investigation
of lime/cement columns). SBUFAnslag Projekt 1075.
Pusch, R., Hansbo, S., Berg, G. & Henricson, E., 1974. Brighet och sttningar vid
grundlggning p berg. (Bearing capacity and settlement when founding on rock).
Svenska Byggnadsentreprenrfreeningen, Report No. 11.
Schneider, P. J., 1963. Temperature response charts. New York/ London, Wiley.
Schmertmann, J. H., 1955. The undisturbed consolidation behaviour of clay. Transactions
ASCE, Vol. 120.
Schmertmann, J. H., Hartmann, J. P. & Brown, P. R., 1978. Improved strain influence
factor diagrams. ASCE, J. Soil Mech. Found. Div., No. GT 8.
Schulter, A. & Wagener, H., 1989. Improvement of clay and silt by dewatering with a new
anchoring technology. Proc. 12th Int. Conf. Soil Mech. Found. Eng., Vol. 2,14091414.
Simonini, P. & Sorenzo, M, 1987. Design and performance of piles driven into a soft
cohesive deposit. Proc. Int. Symp. on Geot. Eng. of Soft Soils, Mexico, Vol. 1,371378.
Smith, W. W., 1978. Stresses in rigid pipe. ASCE, Transp. Eng. J., Vol. 104,No. TE 3.
Spangler, M. G., 1948. Underground conduitsAn appraisal of modem research. ASCE,
Trans., Vol. 113.
Svensson, P. L., 1991. Soilstructure interaction of foundations on soft clayExperience
during the last ten years. Proc. 10th European Conf. Soil Mech. Found. Eng., Florence,
Vol II, 583586.
Szchy, ., 1965. Der Grundbau, Vol. 2, Part 1Die Baugrube. SpringerVerlag, Wien/
New York.
Sllfors, G., 1975. Preconsolidation pressure of soft highplastic clays. Ph. D. Thesis,
Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg.
Terzaghi, K., 1923. Die Berechnung der Durchlssigkeitsziffer des Tones aus dem Verlauf
der hydrodynamischen Spannungserscheinungen. Akad. Wissensch., Wien, Sitzungsber.
Bd. 132, H. 1, Mat.Naturwissensch. Klasse.
Terzaghi, K., 1925. Erdbaumechanik. LeipzigWien.
Terzaghi, K., 1943. Theoretical soil mechanics. New York.
stedt, ., Weiner, L. & Holm, G., 1990. Friktionsplar. Brfrmagans tillvxt med tiden.
(Friction piles. Increase in bearing capacity with time). Preprint, Swedish Geotech. Inst.,
Linkping.
CORRIGENDA
(p(x)= = exp( )
ERRATUM
Alphan, I., 1967. The empirical evaluation of the coefficient K0 and K0R. Jap. Soc. Soil
Mech. Found. Eng., Soil and Found., Vol. 7, No. 1, 3140.
American Concrete Pipe Association, ACPA, 1988. Concrete pipe handbook. ISBN 090
386816, Vienna, USA.
Bergado, D. T., Chai, C. T., Alfaro, M. C. & Balasubramaniam, A. S., 1992. Improvement
techniques of soft ground in subsiding and lowland environment. Asian Inst, of Technology,
Bangkok.
Berggren, B., 1981. Gravplar p friktionsjordsttningar och brfrmaga (Bored piles
on noncohesive soilssettlement and bearing capacity). Ph. D. Thesis, Chalmers
University of Technology, Gothenburg.
Bustamante, M. G. & Gianeselli, L., 1981. Readjustment des paramtres des calculs des
pieux. Proc. 10th Int. Conf. Soil Mech. Found. Eng., Vol. 2, 643646.
Cambefort, H., 1967. Injection des sols. Eyrolles, Vol. 1 and 2.
Chambosse, G. & Dobson, T., 1982. Stone columns IEstimation of bearing capacity and
expected settlement in cohesive soils. GKN Keller Inc., Tampa, Florida.
Caquot, ., Kerisel, J. & Absi, F., 1973. Tables de bute et de pousse. GauthierVillars,
ParisBruxellesMontral.
Donchev, P., 1980. Compaction of loess by saturation and explosion. Int. Conf. on Com
paction, Paris, Vol 1, 313317.
Esrig, M. J., 1968. Pore pressures, consolidation, and electrokinetics. Proc. ASCE, J. Soil
Mech. Found. Eng., Vol. 94, SM 4.
Hansbo, S., 1962. Ny konapparat for bestmning av lerors skrhallfasthet. (A new cone
apparatus for determination of the shear strength of clays). Byggmstaren No. 10, 215
220.
Hansbo, S., Hofmann, E. & Mosesson, J., 1973. stra Nordstaden, Gothenburg. Experiences
concerning a difficult foundation problem and its unorthodox solution. Proc. 8th Int.
Conf. Soil Mech. Found. Eng., Moscow, Vol. 2.2, 105110.
Hansbo, S. & Jendeby, L., 1983. A case study of two alternative foundation principles:
conventional friction piling and creep piling. Vg och Vattenbyggaren, No.78,2931.
Hansbo, S. & Kllstrm, R., 1983. Creep pilesa costeffective alternative to conventional
friction piles. Vg och vattenbyggaren No. 78, 2327.
Hansbo, S., Pramborg, B. & Nordin, P. O., 1977. The Vnern terminal. Illustrative example
of dynamic consolidation of hydraulically placed fill of organic silt and sand. Sols Soils,
No. 25,511.
Hardin, B. O. & Black, W. L., 1969. Vibration modulus of normally consolidated clay.
(Closure). Proc. ASCE, J. Soil Mech. Found. Div., Vol. 95, No. SM 6, 15311537.
Hardin, B. O. & Richart, F. E. Jr., 1963. Elastic wave velocities in granular soils. Proc.
ASCE, J. Soil Mech. Found. Div., Vol. 89, No. SM 1, 3565.
Jamiolkowski, M., Ladd, C. C , Germaine, J. T. & Lancelotta, R., 1985. New developments
in field and laboratory testing of soils. Proc. 11th Int. Conf. Soil Mech. Found. Eng., San
Francisco, Vol 1,57154.
Janbu, ., 1965. Consolidation of clay layers based on nonlinear stressstrain. Proc. 6th
Int. Conf. Soil Mech. Found. Eng., Montreal, Vol. 2, 8387.
Karol, R. H., 1960. Field tests for evaluating the effectiveness of a grouting operation. Am.
Cyan. Co Expl. and Min. Chem. Dep.
Larsson, R., 1975. Konsolidering av lera med elektroosmos. (Consolidation of clay by
means of electroosmosis). Byggforskningen R45: 1975.
Larsson, R., 1977. Basic behaviour of Scandinavian soft clays. Swedish Geotech. Institute,
Report No. 4.
Liedberg, S., 1991. Earth pressure distribution against rigid pipes under various bedding
conditions. Ph. D. Thesis, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg.
Littlejohn, G. S., 1992. Chemical grouting. In: M. P. Moseley (Editor), Ground improve
ment, Blackie Academic & Professional, CRC Press, Inc., 100129.
Maag, E., 1938.ber die Verfestigung und Dichtung des Baugrundes (Injektionen).
Erdbautechnik, .
Mesri, G. & Godlewski, P. M.,1977. Time and stresscompressibility interrelationship.
ASCE, J. Geotech. Eng. Div., GT 5, 417430.
Olander, H. C , 1950. Stress analysis of concrete pipe. US Bureau Reel. Eng. Monographs,
No. 6.
Pramborg, B. & Albertsson, B., 1992. Underskning av kalk/cementpelare. (Investigation
of lime/cement columns). SBUFAnslag Projekt 1075.
Pusch, R., Hansbo, S., Berg, G. & Henricson, E., 1974. Brighet och sttningar vid
grundlggning p berg. (Bearing capacity and settlement when founding on rock).
Svenska Byggnadsentreprenrfreeningen, Report No. 11.
Schneider, P. J., 1963. Temperature response charts. New York/ London, Wiley.
Schmertmann, J. H., 1955. The undisturbed consolidation behaviour of clay. Transactions
ASCE, Vol. 120.
Schmertmann, J. H., Hartmann, J. P. & Brown, P. R., 1978. Improved strain influence
factor diagrams. ASCE, J. Soil Mech. Found. Div., No. GT 8.
Schulter, A. & Wagener, H., 1989. Improvement of clay and silt by dewatering with a new
anchoring technology. Proc. 12th Int. Conf. Soil Mech. Found. Eng., Vol. 2,14091414.
Simonini, P. & Sorenzo, M, 1987. Design and performance of piles driven into a soft
cohesive deposit. Proc. Int. Symp. on Geot. Eng. of Soft Soils, Mexico, Vol. 1,371378.
Smith, W. W., 1978. Stresses in rigid pipe. ASCE, Transp. Eng. J., Vol. 104,No. TE 3.
Spangler, M. G., 1948. Underground conduitsAn appraisal of modem research. ASCE,
Trans., Vol. 113.
Svensson, P. L., 1991. Soilstructure interaction of foundations on soft clayExperience
during the last ten years. Proc. 10th European Conf. Soil Mech. Found. Eng., Florence,
Vol II, 583586.
Szchy, ., 1965. Der Grundbau, Vol. 2, Part 1Die Baugrube. SpringerVerlag, Wien/
New York.
Sllfors, G., 1975. Preconsolidation pressure of soft highplastic clays. Ph. D. Thesis,
Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg.
Terzaghi, K., 1923. Die Berechnung der Durchlssigkeitsziffer des Tones aus dem Verlauf
der hydrodynamischen Spannungserscheinungen. Akad. Wissensch., Wien, Sitzungsber.
Bd. 132, H. 1, Mat.Naturwissensch. Klasse.
Terzaghi, K., 1925. Erdbaumechanik. LeipzigWien.
Terzaghi, K., 1943. Theoretical soil mechanics. New York.
stedt, ., Weiner, L. & Holm, G., 1990. Friktionsplar. Brfrmagans tillvxt med tiden.
(Friction piles. Increase in bearing capacity with time). Preprint, Swedish Geotech. Inst.,
Linkping.
CORRIGENDA
(p(x) =  7 = e x p (  2)
72
ERRATUM
R E F E R E N C E LIST; C O M P L E M E N T A R Y A D D I T I O N
Alphan, I., 1967. The empirical evaluation of the coefficient K0 and K0R. Jap. Soc. Soil Mech.
Found. Eng., Soil and Found., Vol. 7, No. 1, 3140.
American Concrete Pipe Association, ACPA, 1988. Concrete pipe handbook. ISBN 090
386816, Vienna, USA.
Bergado, D. T., Chai, C. T., Alfaro, M. C. & Balasubramaniam, A. S., 1992. Improvement
techniques of soft ground in subsiding and lowland environment. Asian Inst, of Technology,
Bangkok.
Berggren, B., 1981. Gravplar p friktionsjordsttningar och brfrmaga (Bored piles on
noncohesive soilssettlement and bearing capacity). Ph. D. Thesis, Chalmers University
of Technology, Gothenburg.
Bustamante, M. G. & Gianeselli, L., 1981. Readjustment des paramtres des calculs des
pieux. Proc. 10th Int. Conf. Soil Mech. Found. Eng., Vol. 2, 643646.
Cambefort, H., 1967. Injection des sols. Eyrolles, Vol. 1 and 2.
Chambosse, G. & Dobson, T., 1982. Stone columns IEstimation of bearing capacity and
expected settlement in cohesive soils. GKN Keller Inc., Tampa, Florida.
Caquot, ., Kerisel, J. & Absi, F., 1973. Tables de bute et de pousse. GauthierVillars,
ParisBruxellesMontral
Esrig, M. J., 1968. Pore pressures, consolidation, and electrokinetics. Proc. ASCE, J. Soil
Mech. Found. Eng., Vol. 94, SM 4.
Hansbo, S. & Jendeby, L., 1983. A case study of two alternative foundation principles:
conventional friction piling and creep piling. Vg och Vattenbyggaren, N o . 7  8 , 2 9  3 1 .
Hansbo, S. & Kllstrm, R., 1983. Creep pilesa costeffective alternative to conventional
friction piles. Vg och vattenbyggaren No. 78, 2327.
Hansbo, S., Pramborg, B. & Nordin, P. O., 1977. The Vnern terminal. Illustrative example
of dynamic consolidation of hydraulically placed fill of organic silt and sand. Sols Soils,
No. 25, 5  1 1 .
Hardin, B. O. & Black, W. L., 1969. Vibration modulus of normally consolidated clay.
(Closure). Proc. ASCE, J. Soil Mech. Found. Div., Vol. 95, No. SM 6, 15311537.
Hardin, B. O. & Richart, F. E. Jr., 1963. Elastic wave velocities in granular soils. Proc.
ASCE, J. Soil Mech. Found. Div., Vol. 89, No. SM 1, 3565.
Karol, R. H., 1960. Field tests for evaluating the effectiveness of a grouting operation. Am.
Cyan. Co Expl. and Min. Chem. Dep.
Larsson, R., 1977. Basic behaviour of Scandinavian soft clays. Swedish Geotech. Institute,
Report No. 4.
Liedberg, S., 1991. Earth pressure distribution against rigid pipes under various bedding
conditions. Ph. D. Thesis, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg.
Littlejohn, G. S., 1992. Chemical grouting. In: M. P. Moseley (Editor), Ground improve
ment, Blackie Academic & Professional, CRC Press, Inc., 100129.
Mesri, G. & Godlewski, P. M., 1977. Time and stresscompressibility interrelationship.
ASCE, J. Geoteh. Eng. Div., GT 5,417430.
Olander, H. C , 1950. Stress analysis of concrete pipe. US Bureau Reel. Eng. Monographs,
No. 6.
Schneider, P. J., 1963. Temperature response charts. New York/ London, Wiley.
Schmertmann, J. H., 1955. The undisturbed consolidation behaviour of clay. Transactions
ASCE, Vol. 120.
Schmertmann, J. H., Hartmann, J. P. & Brown, P. R., 1978. Improved strain influence factor
diagrams. ASCE, J. Soil Mech. Found. Div., No. GT 8.
Simonini, P. & Sorenzo, M, 1987. Design and performance of piles driven into a soft
cohesive deposit. Proc. Int. Symp. on Geot. Eng. of Soft Soils, Mexico, Vol. 1,371378.
Smith, W. W., 1978. Stresses in rigid pipe. ASCE, Transp. Eng. J., Vol. 104,No. TE 3.
Spangler, M. G., 1948. Underground conduitsAn appraisal of modem research. ASCE,
Trans., Vol. 113.
Svensson, P. L., 1991. Soilstructure interaction of foundations on soft clayExperience
during the last ten years. Proc. 10th European Conf. Soil Mech. Found. Eng., Florence,
Vol II, 583586.
Szchy, ., 1965. Der Grundbau, Vol. 2, Part 1Die Baugrube. SpringerVerlag, Wien/
New York.
Sllfors, G., 1975. Preconsolidation pressure of soft highplastic clays. Ph. D. Thesis,
Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg.
Terzaghi, K., 1923. Die Berechnung der Durchlssigkeitsziffer des Tones aus dem Verlauf
der hydrodynamischen Spannungserscheinungen. Akad. Wissensch., Wien, Sitzungsber.
Bd. 132, H. 1, Mat.Naturwissensch. Klasse.
Terzaghi, K., 1925. Erdbaumechanik. LeipzigWien.
Terzaghi, K., 1943. Theoretical soil mechanics. New York.
stedt, ., Weiner, L. & Holm, G., 1990. Friktionsplar. Brfrmagans tillvxt med tiden.
(Friction piles. Increase in bearing capacity with time). Preprint, Swedish Geotech. Inst.,
Linkping.
CORRIGENDA
Crossreferences: Delete:
Add:
Foundation Engineering
Sven Hansbo
ELSEVIER
ISBN 0444885498
No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system of transmitted in any
form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the
prior written permission of the publisher, Elsevier Science B.V., C o p y r i g h t and Permissions
Department, P.O. Box 5 2 1 , 1000 AM Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Special regulations for readers in the U.S.A.  This publication has been registered with the
Copyright Clearance Center Inc. (CCC), Salem, Massachusetts. Information can be obtained from
the CCC about conditions under which photocopies of parts of this publication may be made in
the U.S.A. All other copyright questions, including photocopying outside of the U.S.A., should be
refered to the publisher.
No responsibility is assumed by the publisher for any injury and/or damage to persons or property
as a matter of products liability, negligence or otherwise, or from any use or operation of any
methods, products, instructions or ideas contained in the material herein.
PREFACE
Sven Hansbo
Introduction 1
INTRODUCTION
(i) Soilstructure interaction. T h e aim of foundation engineering is to find solutions to the
foundation p r o b l e m s which safeguard structural stability and lifelong serviceability of
the building in a c c o r d a n c e with the o w n e r ' s requirements. In the design of a foundation,
it has to b e realised that the supporting soil, the foundation and the superstructure form
one single unit. Therefore, the structural engineer and the geotechnical engineer must
work in close cooperation to find the best possible solution under the given circumstances.
In order to avoid excessive settlements, causing d a m a g e to the building or cutting down
its serviceability, the building will h a v e to be founded on soil strata that are strong enough
to carry the building load. A c o m m o n task for the geotechnical and structural engineers
is to choose a foundation system that does not cause unacceptable deformations of the
superstructure. T h e choice b e t w e e n a shallow foundation on, for e x a m p l e , footings
placed directly in the soil at shallow depth, and a deep foundation by, for e x a m p l e , the
use of piles depends on the geotechnical characteristics of the subsoil and on the
architectural and functional requirements placed on the building. Evidently, a thorough
k n o w l e d g e of the geotechnical and geological circumstances at the building site is
imperative. Only then can a reliable analysis be m a d e of the bearing capacity of a certain
type of foundation and of the settlements to b e expected. T h e m o r e reliable the geotech
nical basis for analysis, the better the possibilities of choosing the best foundation
solution from a technical and e c o n o m i c a l point of view.
In cases w h e r e piling m a y s e e m necessary, soil i m p r o v e m e n t w h i c h m a k e s shallow
foundation possible directly in the soil m a y b e the m o s t costeffective solution.
T h e loads acting on conventional buildings are mainly vertical by nature. Horizontal
loads can easily b e taken care of by suitable design of the superstructure. Their influence
on foundation design is usually negligible. However, in the case of bridge and quay
foundations, and m o s t certainly in the case of retaining walls, the influence of horizontal
forces on the foundation design cannot b e neglected.
Building activities often m e a n raising the soil level around the prospective building.
If the soil at the building site is highly compressible, such an operation m a y entail serious
settlement p r o b l e m s , both d u e to the load increase on the subsoil and to longterm
settlement of the fill itself. B y the application of soil i m p r o v e m e n t m e t h o d s , this kind of
problem can b e avoided.
2 Introduction
(ii) Creating a reliable basis for design. One of the most important parts in the design is
to establish a reliable picture of the soil conditions at the building site, both from a
geotechnical and a geological point of view. Therefore, the planning and the realisation
of the site investigation are vital for successful design. This fact is often neglected. From
the client's viewpoint, the money spent on soil investigations is unprofitable and should
therefore be minimised. This has entailed a common procedure of inviting tenders for soil
investigations, which doubtless hazards the information needed. It is but natural that the
economic pressure exerted on the field crew in an investigation received by tender can
have a negative influence on the results obtained. This may be the case even where the
skill of the field personnel is beyond question. The extent of the investigation, and even
the method of investigation, may also have to be modified with regard to the results
obtained. These facts speak against tendering; they also speak for a very close co
operation between the geotechnical expert on the one hand and the field investigation
crew on the other. In reality, for liability reasons, the field crew and the geotechnical
expert, who is responsible for the interpretation of the results obtained, should preferably
belong to the same organisation.
A correct determination of the strength and deformation properties of the soil is in fact
one of the most difficult tasks in geotechnical engineering. Their determination has to be
coupled with just the type of problem that is encountered in the design. In most cases in
practice, in situ investigations are preferable to laboratory investigations. However, for
determination of longterm deformation properties of cohesive soils, laboratory inves
tigations are preferable to in situ ones. Sampling and laboratory investigations are also
required for the reason of soil classification which is necessary for the final assessment
of the geomechanical properties of the soil. Unfortunately, the classification systems vary
in different parts of the world, and this situation most probably will persist due to local
tradition and local soil conditions.
(iii) Execution. The execution of the foundation often entails the need for excavations
being carried out to a great depth. The problems connected with excavation for founda
tion purposes often represent the most difficult and dangerous part of the j o b . Deep
excavations, with regard to slope and bottom stability, support of vertical cuts, etc. are
therefore just as important a part of the design as that of the foundation itself.
Quite often, provisional structures, necessary for the support of vertical cuts, can also
be utilised as structural members of the building itself. This is, for example, the case with
diaphragm walls. The borderline between the method of foundation in itself and the
execution of the excavation for the foundation has more or less vanished.
Evidently, to be a competent foundation engineer, broad knowledge of soil and struc
tural mechanics is imperative. Furthermore, knowledge of geology is extremely important
for a correct assessment of the possible variation in geotechnical properties to be
expected at a building site.
Introduction 3
(v)Aim of the book. In this textbook, those parts of soil mechanics are included which are
deemed to b e specially important in relation to the problems encountered in foundation
engineering. Certain parts are included for the purpose of increasing the r e a d e r ' s physical
understanding of the mechanical behaviour of soil and rock. T h e intention is to m a k e it
easier for the reader to grasp the context of the b o o k without need of looking into refer
ence books.
N o w a d a y s , c o m p u t e r analyses (finite element analysis, b o u n d a r y element analysis or
finite difference analysis) have b e c o m e popular and widely used in geotechnical design.
Results obtained by backanalysis, presented in the literature, are usually in very close
agreement with real behaviour. As yet, however, prediction of the results to b e expected
in foundation design by computer analysis is rarely m o r e reliable than the results obtained
by simple ' h a n d calculations'. With regard to the uncertainties in soil modelling for com
puter analyses, these will not b e treated in the present textbook. T h o s e interested are
referred to a textbook by B o w l e s (1988).
With m o d e r n scientific calculators it is very simple to solve seemingly complicated
implicit formulae which in fact reduces the need of diagrams. All the same, diagrams are
helpful under certain circumstances, so in this textbook both formulae (with derivation,
if deemed necessary) and corresponding diagrams are given in parallel.
4 Fundamentals
FUNDAMENTALS
1.2 Microstructure
Fig. 1. Scanning microscope pictures of clay particles. Glacial quick clay (top) and lacustrine clay.
6 Fundamentals
illite but the attraction between the crystal monolayers of montmorillonite is weaker and
therefore allows expansion of the interspace between the layers in connection with water
uptake. Montmorillonite clay therefore behaves differently from other clays in that it is
prone to swelling w h e n unloaded or exposed to water.
As a result of their crystalline structure, particles of clay and m i c a minerals have a m o r e
or less flat, flakelike form with very irregular contours. T h e edges of the particles are thin
Fig. 2. Ultrathin cuts of marine (top) and lacustrine clays photographed using a transmission electron
microscope and schematic pictures of their structure (after Pusch, 1970).
Fundamentals 7
Fig. 3. Microphotograph of sand showing cementation in the contact surface between grains.
8 Fundamentals
(ii) Crystalline, rockforming materials. Crystals of feldspar and quartz, which are
crystalline, rockforming materials, h a v e anisotropic strength characteristics and have
therefore a shape which is associated with that of a prism. Particles of feldspar and quartz
less than 2 in size (belonging to the clay fraction) exist in great number also in coarse
grained soils (Fig. 4) but the effect of these particles on strength and deformation is not
similar to the effect exerted by the clay particles.
(iii) Organic material. Besides the organic substance visible to the naked eye, such as
fruits, leaves, roots, seeds, etc., w e find microscopic remainders of spores, pollen, micro
Fig. 4. Claysize quartz and feldspar particles in sand from a sand pit in Sweden.
Fundamentals 9
scopic animals, algae, germs and viruses as well as organic molecules and c o m p o u n d s .
Living as well as dead organisms exist.
T h e organic matter is b o u n d to the surface of the clay particles via hydrophilic groups
which, depending on the electrolytic composition, m a y give rise either to a protecting
coat or to the formation of a cementing gel complex. Generally speaking, the organic
substance and its bonds are a m o r p h o u s in nature, which implies a strong tendency
towards creep deformations on loading. This effect is amplified by the fact that the degree
of order of the water in the region of contact b e t w e e n the grains is low. Organic matter
contributes to the creation of a very large v o l u m e of voids in the soil. This is also the case
as to coarsegrained soils. Organic soils are therefore generally very compressible.
1.2 Macrostructure
In a geological formation every type of stratum forming an integral part of the soil mass
has its specific mechanical characteristics depending upon grain size, grain shape, grain
origin, v o l u m e of voids, etc. T h e revelation of those structural features that m a y have a
decisive influence on foundation design is one of the foremost aims of soil investigations.
T h e extent and choice of m e t h o d of soil investigation is thus very m u c h dependent on the
geological situation at the site.
(i) Structural anisotropy. In sedimentary soils, the strata are typically horizontal or nearly
horizontal. Coarsegrained layers are often e m b e d d e d in finegrained soils and vice versa.
Undetected layers with different characteristics from those of the soil mass as a whole are
often the cause of unsuccessful foundation design and even of disastrous events. For
e x a m p l e , the landslide at Furre in the centre of N o r w a y took place along a thin quick clay
layer, e m b e d d e d in a deep deposit of mainly sand and silt and sloping at an angle of about
6 degrees towards the river N a m s e n (Hutchinson, 1961). This thin clay layer was not
discovered until the slide had taken place.
Impervious layers in coarsegrained soil m a y serve as a watertight lid and cause
problems in connection with deep excavations (for e x a m p l e hydraulic uplift).
Coarsegrained layers e m b e d d e d in clay deposits are of great i m p o r t a n c e for the
overall permeability in the horizontal direction. In hilly surroundings, continuous coarse
grained layers e m b e d d e d in clay deposits are often fed with water under artesian pressure,
which leads to a condition of h y d r o d y n a m i c equilibrium.
Socalled erratic strata, representing very irregular and unpredictable stratification,
are of particular concern in foundation engineering. Disturbed or distorted stratification
is quite c o m m o n . An e x a m p l e is given in Fig. 5.
(ii) Nonhomogeneities. There is almost no soil deposit that can be considered fully
h o m o g e n e o u s . T h e deformation and strength characteristics are, for e x a m p l e , normally
different in the vertical and the horizontal directions, not only because of variations in soil
structure but also because of the effect of stress history. Of course, the stratification in
itself gives rise to n o n  h o m o g e n e o u s conditions.
Till is a typical e x a m p l e of n o n  h o m o g e n e o u s soil: a conglomeration of grains with a
very large variation in size and shape, most of which are sharpedged. Coarser grains are
normally e m b e d d e d in a finegrained matrix that governs mechanical behaviour. In
boulder clay (clay till), fissure systems form planes of weakness.
Clay deposits often contain vertical channels formed by roots or by gas evolution. This
is especially the case at shallow depth, for e x a m p l e in dry crust clay. Open root channels,
which for some species of clover can extend to depths of about 5 m, are recognised by
a change in colour and stiffness. Moreover, deepgoing fissures normally extend through
the dry crust d o w n into the underlying soft clay.
In foundation engineering, local nonhomogeneities are of particular danger. For
e x a m p l e , lenses of highly compressible soils e m b e d d e d in deposits, which as a whole can
be considered to b e very satisfactory under any proposed foundations, are often the cause
of detrimental, differential settlement of buildings.
1.3 Voids
(i) Content of matter. T h e voids in the soil are filled with either water or gas or both. T h e
groundwater always contains dissolved elements, both ionised or nonionised, and salts
as well as suspensions of mineral particles, h u m u s gel or other organic matter, gases, etc.
T h e content of organic matter can be roughly determined by vaporisation of the ground
water after which the remainders are ovendried at 180C for one hour and then weighed.
T h e result is c o m p a r e d with the electrical conductivity of the groundwater.
Fundamentals 11
T h e substances usually dissolved in the water are different kinds of gases, such as
oxygen, nitrogen, h y d r o g e n sulphide, m e t h a n e and carbon dioxide; different elements,
such as silicate, iron, calcium, m a g n e s i u m , sodium and potassium; different kinds of
salts, such as carbonates and bicarbonates, sulphates, chlorides, nitrates, h u m t e s and
tannins. T h e concentration of dissolved matter can b e subjected to strong variations, from
about 0.01%o in rain water and snow to over 3 0 % in certain salt lakes. T h e total
concentration of suspended matter is very rarely above 0.5%c (0.005%o in respect of
mineral particles and, except for organic soils, 0.15%o in respect of organic matter). T h e
influence of dissolved and suspended matter on the unit weight of g r o u n d w a t e r m a y have
to be taken into consideration in geotechnical analysis.
T h e presence of gas in the soil voids is of great importance in geotechnical design. T h e
most c o m m o n gases are carbon dioxide above the groundwater level and m e t h a n e below.
T h e solubility of gases in the water is directly proportional to the water pressure and
inversely proportional to the temperature. T h e concentration of dissolved gases in the
groundwater varies generally from 0.001 to 0.1%o.
(ii) Volume of voids. In soil m e c h a n i c s , the v o l u m e of voids in the soil is either expressed
in terms of porosity or in terms of void ratio. T h e porosity is defined as the ratio of v o l u m e
of voids to total v o l u m e and is designated by the symbol , while the void ratio is defined
as the ratio of v o l u m e of voids to v o l u m e of solids and is designated by the symbol e.
Expressed in t h e terms given in Fig. 6, w e thus have:
n = VpIV (1)
e = Vp/Vs (2)
volume mass
ma
Va gas
density pa
V vw
water
density pw
,
 ' ^'"*^ VJ; ^:::.7.
,
ms
solids:,
density'^','" '." ' '''"",'
Fig. 6. A schematic picture of a soil element divided into its constituents: solids, water and gas.
12 Fundamentals
e = (3)
ln
w  mwlms (4)
(ii) Degree of water saturation. T h e degree of water saturation Sr is obtained by the relation :
Sr=Vw/Vp (5)
1.5 Density
(i) Specific density. The specific density (i.e. the density of solid material) is defined by
the relation:
V
Ps = s' s (7)
(ii) Grain (particle) density. The grains themselves are seldom completely solid but have
a certain porosity and, therefore, from a practical viewpoint, it is better to make use of
grain density instead of specific density. The grain density is defined by the relation:
P g = mg/Vg (8)
TABLE 1.
Grain (particle) density of some different minerals
3
Mineral Grain density, t/m Comments
3
Remarks: According to Jelinek (1966), the average value of pg can be assumed equal to 2.65 t/m for
3
sand and gravel and 2.75 t / m for clay and clayey silt
14 Fundamentals
TABLE 2.
Typical bulk density values
3
Soil type Density (t/m )
coarse grains of sandstone and limestone, for example, there may be a noteworthy
difference between the respective numerical values.
Typical grain densities are presented in Table 1.
= m/V (9)
where m = total mass,
V = total volume.
The bulk density can also be calculated on the basis of porosity and degree of water
saturation Sr according to the relation:
P =  ^  ()
1+ e
Typical bulk density values are presented in Table 2.
(iv) Dry density. The dry density pd is the mass of solid matter per unit volume, i.e. the
mass that the soil would have per unit volume if the water in its voids were removed
without volume change taking place. Its numerical value can be obtained by either of the
relations:
As can b e seen, the dry density is directly correlated to the porosity (void ratio) of the
soil. It is therefore c o m m o n l y used as a m e a s u r e of the result achieved by compaction of
soil (p. 400).
Example 1: Determine the dry density, the degree of water saturation and the water content of a soil
3
with bulk density = 1.7 t/m and void ratio e = 0.8.
3
Solution: Assuming that the grain density pg = 2.65 t/m w e find:
3
pd = p j / ( l + e) = 2.65/1.8 = 1.47 t/m ,
1.7 = = (pg + eSr)/(l +e) = (2.65 + 0.8S r)/1.8,
whence Sr = 0.51,
w = mwlms = eSrpw/pg = 0.80.511.0/2.65 .= 0.15 (15%).
It is often quite difficult to distinguish b e t w e e n soil and rock. T h u s the rock surface m a y
be subjected to severe weathering, converting rock to soil and m a k i n g the border line
between r o c k and soil indistinct. Since excavation costs for soil is generally m u c h lower
than for rock, this uncertainty m a y entail controversies between contractors and clients.
It is obviously important to h a v e a clear definition of what is m e a n t with rock in civil
engineering. T h e definition accepted in S w e d e n can serve as an e x a m p l e . Accordingly,
rock is defined as that part of the earth 's crust which is characterised by high hardness and
low porosity and which cannot normally be dislodged by excavation.
2.1 Microstructure
T h e microstructural features of rock concern the matrix of individual crystals and their
atomic arrangement. Investigations h a v e indicated that the strength and deformation
properties of the r o c k material are governed by microstructural anisotropy. T h u s , micro
structural features m a y be important for the shear strength of small rock samples tested
on a laboratory scale, but they are not significant of strength and deformation properties
of a rock m a s s . T h e s e are governed by macrostructural features, such as planes of
weakness, w e a k zones, joints, etc.
2.2 Macrostructure
Fig. 7. Clayaltered zone has become fluid after being exposed to air.
Fundamentals 17
the rock cover (Fig. 8) and to longterm subsidence of the ground due to creep in the rock
material.
3. INFLUENCE OF GROUNDWATER
(i) The vadose and seepage zones. Nearest to the ground surface w e find t w o z o n e s t h e
vadose z o n e and the seepage z o n e i n which the humidity varies b e t w e e n nearly
complete dryness and almost full capillary saturation.
In the top z o n e t h e v a d o s e z o n e t h e soil humidity is subjected to large variations
depending on external conditions. It is affected by the infiltration of rainwater, evaporation
from vegetation, evaporation during dry periods, formation of dew at night, frost activity,
and so on. T h e water is mainly concentrated at points of contact b e t w e e n grains.
In the seepage zone, the humidity normally increases with depth until it reaches almost
full saturation in the i m m e d i a t e vicinity of the capillary z o n e below. H e r e the groundwater
is in steady motion under the influence of gravitational forces. Pervious layers in low
p e r m e a b l e soil can b e filled with flowing water, whereas the water saturation in the soil
m a y otherwise b e low. Local bodies of water can also b e found.
(ii) The capillary zone. In the capillary zone, nearest a b o v e the g r o u n d w a t e r surface, the
water is held b y capillary forces. T h e surface of the capillary z o n e is irregular due to
variations in the diameter and shape of the voids, and its level varies with changes in the
18 Fundamentals
groundwater level. T h e thickness of the zone is dependent on the capillary rise of the soil
in question (grain size and density).
T h e capillary rise b e c o m e s smaller in the case w h e r e the g r o u n d w a t e r level rises than
in the case w h e r e it falls. T h e reason is that the upper part of the capillary zone contains
airfilled pockets which set b o u n d s for the m o v e m e n t of water. In the lower part of the
capillary zone, however, the voids are completely filled with water. Here the water m o v e 
ment is governed by the same physical laws as b e l o w groundwater level. T h e height of
the capillary z o n e in the case of a sinking groundwater surface is given in Table 3.
T h e water in the capillary zone, as well as in the unsaturated zones above, is bound
mainly by surface tension in the interfaces between water, soil particles and gas. Other
types of binding forces, such as sorption forces, and chemical bindings also contribute.
TABLE 3.
Approximate capillary rise, in m (sinking groundwater level)
Fig. 9. Definition of groundwater level. In the capillary zone, the pore pressure differs from the
atmospheric pressure by the capillary suction hc  a. Below the groundwater level, the pore pressure
differs from the atmospheric pressure by the pressure exerted by a water column of height h.
2 I I I
Hydraulic head in relation to ground level, m
Fig. 10. Seasonal variation of pore water pressure at different depths in a clay deposit in Gothenburg,
Sweden. (After Berntson, 1983).
20 Fundamentals
T h e concept of total and effective stresses constitutes the basis of soil mechanics,
although it does not always seem to b e fully appreciated.
By definition, the normal and shear stresses acting on a section surface of a material
are a s s u m e d to b e evenly distributed over a solid area. However, a section surface of a
soil consists partly of intersected grains and partly of intersected voids filled with water
or gas, or a combination of both. T h e s u m of all internal stresses on a unit area of the
section surface (intersected grains as well as intersected voids) is k n o w n as total stress.
T h e latter can be considered as carried partly by direct contact be tw e en the grains and
partly by pore water or pore gas, or both combined. T h e part of the total normal stress a
that is carried in the points of contact between grains is called effective stress a ' a n d the
part carried by pore water (gas) is called pore water pressure uw (pore gas pressure ua ) .
In the case of watersaturated soils, the word pore water pressure is usually replaced by
pore pressure and the symbol uw is replaced by the symbol u.
T h e correlation between total stress and effective stress can be expressed by the
relation:
='+ u x+u (\x)
w a (13)
G=o'+uw (14)
Since water and gas cannot take up shear stress, total shear stress is equal to effective
shear stress.
Example 2: Determine the effective vertical stress 3 m below the ground surface.The capillary rise in
the soil is 2 m and the groundwater level is at 4 m depth. The soil in the capillary zone is assumed to
3
be water saturated. The density of nonsaturated soil above the capillary zone is 1.8 t/m and of saturated
3
soil 2.1 t/m .
Solution: The total vertical stress at 3 m depth is equal to = 9.81(1.81 + 2.12) = 58.9 kPa and the pore
water pressure uw =  10 kPa. Thus, the effective stress becomes equal to '\, = 58.9 + 10 = 68.9 kPa.
Fundamentals 21
In a hydrostatic condition, the pore water pressure at any depth is equal to the hydrostatic
pressure m e a s u r e d from the groundwater level. Moreover, the p o r e water pressure at one
and the s a m e level is the s a m e all over the place. T h u s , in both the vertical and the
horizontal directions w e h a v e a state of equal hydraulic head, i.e. the water is in a state
of static equilibrium and consequently n o water flow is taking place. This m a y be thought
of as the natural state in a virgin area but frequently is not. In reality, the pore water
pressure distribution quite often deviates from the hydrostatic o n e and has d o n e so for
ages (Fig. 11). In this case w e h a v e to deal with a h y d r o d y n a m i c condition; a condition
characterised by a steady state flow. T h e direction of flow d e p e n d s upon whether the
hydraulic head increases or decreases in the direction considered. T h e flow is governed
by the hydraulic gradient:
= // (15)
(i) Darcy's law. In the middle of the 19th century, the French engineer Darcy discovered
that the rate of water flow in watersaturated sand followed the simple relationship
(DARCY, 1856):
GW
\ GW
clay
\ clay
m \ \ \
G
g \ / R
10 10 /
1 \
clay <
J3 *
15
V \
\
15
sand * ^ ~ 
~ Aug.76 to May82
20
pore pressure, Aug. 21  7 9
Fig. 11. Equilibrated pore pressure distribution with depth in two clay layers after groundwater lowering
in underlying sand, taking place around 4000 years ago (left) and 1000 years ago (Torstensson, 1975).
22 Fundamentals
= ki (16)
n
= k] i when / < ii
(17)
= k2 (i  z'o) when / > il
11
w h e r e kx and k2 are coefficients of permeability (k2 nkx if ' ),
n> 1,
i0= ii ( \)ln.
Example 3: The groundwater level in a sand deposit is at 0.5 m depth. Determine the effective vertical
3
pressure at 3 m depth in a soil with porosity = 30% and grain density pg = 2.65 t/m if the pore pressure
is increasing linearly with depth below groundwater level to 70 kPa at 5 m depth. The degree of water
saturation above groundwater is equal to 10%.
Solution: There are two alternative solutions, one based on seepage pressure and the other on the basic
relation between total and effective stress.
Using seepage pressure as a basis of analysis w e find:
i = (70/9.81  4 . 5 ) / 4 . 5 = 0.59
The bulk density above groundwater is:
Fundamentals 23
= k2(i  i0)
Hydraulic gradient i
Fig. 12. Observed deviation from Darcy's law at low hydraulic gradients in clay (Hansbo, 1960).
3
= (1  0.3)2.65 + 0.10.31.0 = 1.89 t/m
and the submerged density:
3
p ' = ( l  0 . 3 )  2 . 6 5 = 1.16 t/m
The effective vertical pressure becomes:
<?v = 9.81[1.890.5 + (1.16  0.59)2.5] = 23.4 kPa
Using instead total vs.effective stress concept we find:
& v = 9.81(1.890.5 + 2.162.5)  702.5/4.5 = 23.4 kPa
T h e stress increments induced in the soil due to loading can b e considered as total stress
increments. In soils with a low hydraulic conductivity the i m m e d i a t e effect of loading is
the creation of an excess pore pressure that will carry part of the load until the soil skeleton
has had time to rearrange itself and b e c o m e strong enough to carry the load on its own
(the effective stress increase is b e c o m i n g equal to the total stress increase). Several pore
pressure equations h a v e been suggested for the prediction of excess p o r e pressure in
duced in the soil due to loading. A m o n g these, the ones k n o w n as S k e m p t o n ' s and
H e n k e l ' s are probably best k n o w n . T h e results obtained by the different equations are
very nearly the s a m e irrespective of the loading condition. A c c o r d i n g to S k e m p t o n ' s pore
pressure equation, w h i c h is less complicated than the others, the excess pore pressure Au
is obtained b y the relation:
Au = B [ 3 + (  3) ] (18)
where A and are the socalled S k e m p t o n pore pressure coefficients (Skempton, 1954),
and 3 are the major and m i n o r principle stress i n c r e m e n t s due to loading.
For watersaturated soil, = 1 while for nonsaturated soils < 1. T h e A value depends
24 Fundamentals
30
4
depth 5.5r depth 4 m
"
depth 5 m
2 03
^ External load, kN/m
2
External load, kN/m
Fig. 13. Results of excess pore pressure observations during waterfilling of a steel tank on water
saturated glacial mediumsensitive clay (left) and organic postglacial lowsensitive clay (Sllfors,
1975). Dimensions of tank: diameter 9.6 m; height 5 m. Observations yield A values between the limits
0.14 below and 1.3 above the preconsolidation pressure for the glacial clay and 0.58 below and 1.07
above the preconsolidation pressure for the postglacial clay.
a m o n g other things on the preloading history of the soil. Generally speaking, A = 1/3 for
an elastic material, A > 1/3 for a contractive material, and A < 1/3 for a dilatant material.
T h e A parameter is not a constant but is subjected to a continuous c h a n g e during load
application. Its m a g n i t u d e below the preconsolidation pressure (the m a x i m u m past
pressure) w h e r e the soil skeleton, through earlier consolidation processes, is strong
e n o u g h to carry the load on its o w n is considerably lower than above.
E x a m p l e s of h o w A varies in soft highplasticity clays in the course of loading are given
in Fig. 13.
Fundamentals 25
4. DEFORMATION CONCEPTS
12G/3K
= (20)
; v
2 + 2G/3K
Equations (19) and (20) yield:
= 2G(l+v) (21)
For a m o r e or less incompressible material (in which case the value b e c o m e s very
large), for instance watersaturated clay in undrained condition (mineral particles and
water can be considered incompressible in comparison with the soil skeleton), w e find
= 3 G a n d = 0.5.
In the case of highly compressible soils, the deformation m o d u l u s usually applied in
settlement analysis is determined by m e a n s of compression tests in which lateral strains
are prevented, socalled o e d o m e t e r tests (Fig. 14b).
In classical soil m e c h a n i c s (Terzaghi, K., 1923, 1925), t w o moduli derived from the
results of o e d o m e t e r tests w e r e introduced, namely the coefficient of theoretical
compressibility av = Ae/Aav\ where Ae is the decrease in void ratio due to a vertical stress
increase ' , and the coefficient of v o l u m e compressibility mv  av/(\+e0) = / ' ,
where e0is the initial void ratio and is the relative compression. As the c h a n g e in void
ratio of clay in the virgin state, i.e. for a load a b o v e the past m a x i m u m load on the clay,
was found to b e directly proportional to the logarithm of effective vertical stress increase,
the primary c o m p r e s s i o n index Cc was later introduced, defined as:
Cc = AelA{\o%av') (22)
These " m o d u l i " are all foreign to the traditional moduli used in neighbouring branches
26 Fundamentals
Fig. 14a. Stress/strain conditions for determination of bulk modulus (left) and shear modulus G.
4G
M=K(\+ ) (23)
T h e shear m o d u l u s of soil depends to a high degree on the shear strain level the lower
the strain, the higher the m o d u l u s of deformation. T h e strains occurring in static loading
Fundamentals 27
TABLE 4
Soil parameters and ( = number of loading cycles)
Type of soil
are generally of another order of m a g n i t u d e than in d y n a m i c loading (Fig. 15). This strain
dependence has to b e taken into account in the analysis of foundation p r o b l e m s .
T h e relation b e t w e e n secant m o d u l u s G and shear strain y(G = /) can b e expressed
by the relation (Hardin and Drnevich, 1972):
G = (25)
1+7/*
5
w h e r e G 0 = shear m o d u l u s with reference to a shear strain of about 10~ ,
yh =^[i+aexp(j8^)],
7r 7r
yr  reference value of shear strain corresponding to r m ax / G 0,
and are soil parameters.
T h e and values presented by Hardin and Drnevich are given in Table 4.
To determine the reference shear strain yr w e h a v e to k n o w the initial shear m o d u l u s
G 0 and the shear stress T m ax (Fig. 16).
T h e shear stress leading to failure is governed by the M o h r  C o u l o m b failure criterion,
If w e a s s u m e that, initially, the vertical stress in the soil is ' and the horizontal stress
' = 0', w e find (Fig. 16):
2 2
[(a +  5 cfv) ']  (  5 cfv) (26)
Machine foundations
Traffic vibrations
Offshore gravity structures
Strong earthquakes
( 5 4 :
io  " 10"
Shear strain y
Fig. 15. Range of shear strain amplitudes for different types of loading conditions. (After Andrason, 1979)
28 Fundamentals
1
^{P failure c o n d i t i o n / * ^
/in situ c o n d i t i o n ^ \
max \
' ( '
Fig. 16. The T m ax value to be used for determination of yrcorresponds to the shear stress at failure in the
horizontal shear plane.
T h e preloading history of the soil has a great influence on the deformation properties. One
of the m o s t important parameters in soil mechanics, which has to be investigated in order
to m a k e possible a correct evaluation of the settlement in loading, is the m a x i m u m past
pressure or, as it is generally termed, the preconsolidation pressure. A correct evaluation
of the preconsolidation pressure is of p a r a m o u n t importance both with regard to the
prediction of total settlement and to settlement vs. time relationship. A m o s t widely
utilised m e t h o d of determining the preconsolidation pressure is based on the semi
logarithmic p l o t v o i d ratio e (or strain ) vs. log. according to C a s a g r a n d e (Fig. 17).
However, this m e t h o d can give a preconsolidation pressure that does not exist in reality
(see Fig. 5 1 , p. 78). T h e value obtained also depends on the choice of logarithmic scale.
Therefore, the result should always be checked by using instead a linear plote (or )
vs. a'. The preconsolidation pressure in this case (Fig. 17) can be chosen according to
Sllfors (1975).
40 I 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 I L_J
0 100 200 400 600 800 1000
Effective pressure \ in kPa (lin. scale)
Fig. 17. Oedometer curve presented in lin.log. (full line) and lin.lin. scales (broken line). Lin.log.
curve used for determination of the preconsolidation pressure according to Casagrande. Lin.lin. curve
used for detewrmination fo the preconsolidation pressure according to Sllfors.
d_e = d * + de ) ( 2 7
dt d& dt
(ii) Primary consolidation. T h e consolidation properties of the soil are mostly expressed
in terms of onedimensional (vertical) strain. T h e p a r a m e t e r g o v e r n i n g the duration and
30 Fundamentals
where kv mdkh are permeabilities (hydraulic conductivities) in the vertical and horizontal
directions, respectively,
y w = unit weight of water.
The primary consolidation process is generally defined according to Terzaghi (1923,
1925). T h e basic assumptions behind Terzaghi's theory are:
the soil is watersaturated,
pore water flow is taking part only in the vertical direction (onedimensional
consolidation),
Darcy's law is valid,
the decrease in excess pore water pressure equals the increase in ef fective stress (Acf =  Au),
there is a unique relationship between void ratio and effective stress.
On these assumptions w e can derive the consolidation equation:
2
du M d du du
V =
~V^V^ vTT c
(29)
L
dt Ywdz dz dz
where du/dt is the rate of excess pore water pressure dissipation,
is the depth coordinate (distance from the drained surface),
t is the consolidation time.
In consequence with Terzaghi's theory, the degree of primary consolidation U is
enunciated in the form of remaining excess pore pressure Au in relation to initial excess
pore pressure Au0:
U=lAu/Au0 (30)
In reality, the permeability is a function of the strain, and consequently by the excess
pore water pressure, and therefore the consolidation equation is more correctly written:
Fundamentals 31
Void ratio e
Slope = Ca
logr
Fig. 18. Decrease in void ratio with time of loading of a clay specimen. Primary and secondary con
solidation periods.
2
du du M dk du 2
2
 = c y L + _ _ ( ) (32)
dt dz ywdu dz
T h e error introduced by ignoring the last term in this equation is less important than in
the prevous case, the reason being that the c v value does not usually vary as m u c h with
changes in as the k value with changes in u (in a").
(iii) Secondary consolidation. After, or rather at the end of, the primary consolidation
period, the relative compression (the change in void ratio) is directly proportional to the
logarithm of time elapsed. We have entered into the period named secondary consolidation.
T h e rate of void ratio decrease during secondary consolidation is usually expressed by
the relation (Fig. 18):
Ae = C a A ( l o g i ) (34)
w h e r e cxs(l+e0) = Ca.
(iv) Creep due to shear. Shear deformations are the p r i m e cause of changes in shape. T h e
main part of these deformations take place instantaneously w h e n the load is applied.
However, even under working load condition the shear deformations caused by long
term creep are mostly of the same order of m a g n i t u d e as those taking place immediately
in connection with load application. T h e rate of creep deformation Ascr/At in this case
is directly proportional to the increase in logarithm of time A(log t) and is a function of
the deviatoric stress level  3 ; the higher the deviatoric stress, the higher the rate of
creep deformation. Eventually, creep m a y lead to failure (see par. 5.3).
T h e creep deformations under a given time, due to shear, are normally increasing
linearly with the applied load up to a certain limit, the socalled creep limit. W h e n the load
increases above the creep limit, creep deformations b e c o m e increasingly important.
Therefore, from the point of view of settlement, the creep limit is of great importance.
5. STRENGTH CONCEPTS
(i) Effective and total strength. F r o m a physical viewpoint, the shear strength of soil is
built up of either of two c o m p o n e n t s or both: one that is only dependent on void ratio but
independent of the effective stress (cohesion) and the other that is dependent on the
effective stress (friction). In practice, the shear strength of soil is either expressed in terms
of effective stress by the socalled effective strength parameters c (the effective cohesion
intercept) and ' (the effective angle of internal friction,) or in terms of total stress by the
socalled total strength parameters c (the total cohesion intercept) and (the total angle
of internal friction). In the first case, the shear strength has been determined in a way that
gives us full k n o w l e d g e of the excess pore pressure developed during the test, whereas
in the second case the pore pressure is u n k n o w n . We also speak of the drained strength
parameters cd and in the sense that the shear strength has been determined in drained
condition with complete excess pore pressure dissipation.
' 3 ' \
Fig. 19. The MohrCoulomb failure criterion is represented by the envelope to the Mhr failure circles.
Fundamentals 33
c,
/
cr3 = ' 3 + 3 = + Au3
T h e strength parameters of the soil constitute the basis for the analysis of the bearing
capacity of the ground. Failure is reached w h e n the shear stresses in the soil reach an
upper limit represented by the envelope to the M h r failure circles (Fig. 19). T h e Mohr
C o u l o m b failure criterion is given by the relation:
(ii) Undrained strength . In practice, the risk of failure is often g o v e r n e d by the shear
strength of the soil in undrained condition, i.e. w h e n the water content along the failure
surface remains unchanged. T h e undrained shear strength is particularly important in the
case of cohesive soils. T h e strength parameters in undrained condition are termed cu and
. In watersaturated cohesive soil, the effective stresses b e c o m e unaffected by changes
in total stress (Fig. 20) and h e n c e = 0. T h e failure condition is governed by the relation
Fig. 21. Quick clay in undisturbed (left) and remoulded state. The disturbance of the clay structure due
to remoulding has turned it into a liquid. (By courtesy of AAB).
As pointed out in paragraph 4.4 , creep in cohesive soils induced by deviatoric stresses
of a lower m a g n i t u d e than those conventionally representing the failure condition may
end in failure (Fig. 22). T h e shear stress leading to longterm failure in undrained
condition is defined as creep strength ccr
T h e ratio of deviatoric stress level leading to longterm failure to the deviatoric stress
level leading to failure in standard testing procedures decreases with increasing content
of organic matter and increasing range of plasticity (cf. Fig. 70).
Fig. 22. Observed axial rate of strain vs. logarithm of time in undrained triaxial test under two different
stress conditions. Bckebol clay with natural water content w=80% and consistency limits wL =75% and
wP = 30%. Undrained shear strength Tj= cu = 17 kPa. The creep strength ccr ~ 0.7cu.
structural anisotropy ( m a d e evident for e x a m p l e by the fact that the permeability in the
horizontal direction is generally higher than in the vertical direction). Moreover,
unisotropic strength properties derive from the fact that the overburden pressure in the
vertical and horizontal directions differ from each other. This entails that every soil
element in its natural state is subjected to a shear stress vector (Fig. 23) which adds to the
shear stress vector induced by the i m p o s e d load.
0.4
4
f
1>
< ) O
0.3 cS
I
<! )
O
} ;
)
& 0.2
<
0.1 '
Fig. 24. Correlation between angle of inclination of failure surface and normalised undrained shear
strength cu/a'0 ( ' 0 = effective overburden pressure). After Bjerrum (1973).
2 2
Slow test
Quick test
j1
Fig. 25. Volume dependence of undrained shear strength exemplified for Swedish boulder clay. Results
of plate loading tests. (Harden, 1974).
Fundamentals 37
F r o m what has been said in paragraph 4 . 2  3 w e realise that the soil structure starts
yielding w h e n it enters into a state of shear failure or w h e n the stresses exceed the
preconsolidation pressure G'C. In a case w h e r e the principal normal stresses are acting in
the vertical and horizontal directions, the yield surface will thus b e represented b y the
M o h r  C o u l o m b failure lines on the one hand (the 0'lines, Fig. 26) and the preconsolidation
pressure in the vertical and horizontal directions on the other. Inside the yield surface
border lines, the soil can b e a s s u m e d to b e h a v e m o r e or less as an elastic material.
2o'c
0.4t
/
Fig. 26. Example of yield stresses and theoretical yield border lines. Medium plastic Drammen clay ( 0
= 30; K0 = 0.5). Inside the border lines, the clay can be assumed to behave elastically. Test results
according to Berre (1975). After Larsson (1977).
38 So/7 classification
SOIL C L A S S I F I C A T I O N
1. O B J E C T
Soil classification is a very important part of the identification process necessary for the
solution of problems involved in foundation engineering. For classification purposes
routine testing p r o g r a m m e s have been m a d e up, the extent of which depend upon the type
of soil to be classified. In foundation engineering classification with regard to geological
background, to particle size ranges and distribution, to plastic properties and organic
constituents and to strength and deformation properties is of principal interest.
Various classification systems exist depending upon tradition and regional geological
conditions. In this textbook, the main outlines of the classification system proposed by
ISO (the International Standardisation Organisation) and C E N (Comit Europen de
Normalisation) will be presented. Other classification systems of current interest until the
ISO and C E N standards have been finally adopted will be mentioned briefly.
2. G E O L O G I C A L B A C K G R O U N D
soil and represents, therefore, a very important part of soil identification and classification.
Profound k n o w l e d g e of the geological features at the building site is also of great value
for the evaluation of which investigations should b e carried out and to what extent. If the
geotechnician has a lack of such k n o w l e d g e he ought to w o r k in close cooperation with
geologists.
3. C L A S S I F I C A T I O N A C C O R D I N G T O C O M P O S I T I O N
Every type of mineral soil contains a mixture of grains (particles) of different sizes and
shapes. Grain size and grain size distribution form the fundamental basis for designating
mineral soils using soil fractions to distinguish the major classes of geotechnical behav
iour. Grain size, therefore, serves as a basis for soil classification. Unfortunately, as yet
the fractional limits, which are applied w h e n classifying a soil, are not the same in
different countries. This must be paid attention to in cases of soil classifications which
are presented without reference to any specific classification system.
(i) Fractional limits of mineral soils. As regards grain size, mineral soils are divided into
the following main fractional groups: boulders and cobbles (very coarse fraction), gravel
and sand (coarse fraction) and silt and clay (fine fraction). T h e main fractional groups and
their subdivisions are presented in Table 5.
M o s t of the European countries follow the principles established by I S O / C E N , with
TABLE 5.
Fractional limits according to ISO/CEN. The fractional limits according to the Nordic classification
system, wherever they differ from the ISO/CEN limits, are given in parenthesis.
Boulders >200
(> 600) (Large boulders > 2000)
Cobbles 20060
(60060) (Large cobbles 600200)
(Small cobbles 20060)
Gravel 602 Coarse gravel 6020
Medium gravel 206
Fine gravel 62
Sand 20.06 Coarse sand 20.6
Medium sand 0.60.2
Fine sand 0.20.06
Silt 0.060.002 Coarse silt 0.060.02
Medium silt 0.020.006
Fine silt 0.0060.002
Clay < 0.002 Fine clay < 0.0006
40 Soil classification
(ii) Grainsize distribution. T h e grainsize distribution of soil with grain size between 60
and 0.06 m m is determined using a series of sieves with different m e s h widths. T h e same
set of sieves is used in International standards (ISO/R 565) and in G e r m a n standards (DIN
4188), except that International standards do not include sieves with m e s h widths 0.2,
0.63, and 6.3 m m . F r o m a practical point of view, any set of sieves can b e used to give
a good picture of the grainsize distribution.
Guiding values for the division of coarsegrained and finegrained mineral soils are
given in Table 6.
TABLE 6.
Guiding values for soil classification on a basis of the contents of various fractions.
T h e grainsize distribution of material with grain size < 0.06 m m must be determined
by sedimentation analysis, while the size of boulders and cobbles is determined in the
field by sieving through a grating or by direct measurement.
T h e grain size is indicated by the symbol d (Fig. 27). T h e size of those grains which
correspond to 6 0 % , 4 0 % , etc. on the grainsize distribution curve is denoted d60, d40, etc.
T h e inclination of the grainsize distribution curve, also called the grading curve, is
indicated by the socalled uniformity coefficient C0 = d6Q/dl0. According to the ISO
proposal, the soil is called poorly graded if Cv < 6 and wellgraded if Cv > 6.
T h e uniformity coefficient is sometimes not representative of the grading. This is the
case w h e n o n e or m o r e intermediate fractions are strongly underrepresented. Such soils
2
are termed gapgraded. They are characterised by a coefficient of curvature Cc=d^Q /dQ d
c o m m o n l y b e l o w 1 or above 3.
(iv) Visual observations. In the case of coarser soil material a fairly good estimate can be
m a d e of the size of the grains based on the size of m o r e familiar objects. For e x a m p l e ,
cobbles are larger than h o c k e y balls and gravel larger than lead shots. Sand, at its lower
limit, contains particles that are hardly visible to the naked eye.
In the case of silt and clay where the particles are invisible to the naked eye certain
methods can be utilised to help in the identification. Coarse silt particles can be felt between
with boulders
Fig. 27. Examples of grain size distribution curves and how to determine the uniformity coefficient.
42 So/7 classification
Fig. 28. Example of nomogram used for classification of sedimentary soils (Karlsson & Hansbo, 1984).
In accordance with the exemplified fraction percentages the soil should be designated sandy, silty day.
Example 4: Use the nomogram in Fig. 28 for designation of soil whose content of clay is (a) 20% [(b)
4%] of fines (a) 70% [(b) 45%] and of sand (a) 10% [(b) 22%]. All figures are given in wt.% of material
<60 mm.
Solution: The designation of the soil in example (a) is silty clay and in (b) sandy, gravelly silt.
Soil classification 43
the fingers and give a rough feeling. In the wet state the particles stick together but can
easily b e m o v e d in relation to each other. If the hands are r u b b e d with wet coarse silt, the
material dries rapidly to a p o w d e r which can easily be brushed off. T h e colour is normally
grey.
Medium silt and fine silt in a dry state h a v e a floury character and feel smooth between
the fingers. In wet state the material is plastic and at high water content, sticky. T h e
material can easily b e w a s h e d off the hands. T h e colour of dry material is normally white
grey.
Clay in a wet state is plastic and sticky. It cannot easily be w a s h e d off the h a n d s without
a brush. O n drying, the samples turn into hard l u m p s that cannot b e crushed between the
fingers. T h e colour is normally grey, b r o w n  g r e y or redgrey.
organic and mineral soils. T h e colour is dark and b e c o m e s black w h e n the organic content
exceeds about 5 % . Organic soils also have a distinctive odour.
Peat is a soil formed from vegetable remains, deposited in fens ( l o w m o o r peat) or in
raised b o g s (highmoor peat), with an organic content that exceeds 20 w t % of dry matter
(grain size < 2 m m ) , see Table 7. Depending upon the degree of decomposition, peat is
classified as fibrous peat, pseudofibrous peat and a m o r p h o u s peat, according to the von
Post classification system (von Post, 1921).
Fibrous peat has a low degree of decomposition, a fibrous structure and an easily
recognisable plant structure (primarily white m o s s ) . W h e n squeezing a sample of fibrous
peat in the p a l m of the hand, only water, and no solid matter, passes between the fingers.
Pseudofibrous peat has an intermediate degree of decomposition and a recognisable
plant structure. W h e n squeezed, less than half of the solid matter passes between the
fingers.
Amorphous peat has a high degree of decomposition, no visible plant structure, and a
mushy consistency. W h e n squeezed, more than half of the solid matter passes between
the fingers without free water being separated.
An exact determination of the content of organic matter is rather difficult to achieve.
T h e most c o m m o n methods are the ignition loss method and the colorimetric method. In
the first case, the soil sample should gradually be brought to 9 5 0 C (550C as recommended
in the A S T M Standards seems not always sufficient) and held until completely ashed (not
less than one hour), while in the second case, the organic matter is determined through
rapid wet combustion, as described by Walkley and Black (1934), followed by a
colorimetric test using a light filter for wavelengths of about 6 2 0 p m .
T h e ignition loss method is preferably used for a determination of the organic content
of highly organic soils, especially peat, provided that the lime content of the soil is not
too high (< 2 0 % ) . T h e lime content must be determined and the ignition loss corrected
TABLE 7
Terms for the designation of organic content
Classification systems based on the geotechnical properties of the soil are applied in order
to serve as a m e t h o d o l o g y in the appraisal of foundation problems. Normally, the soil is
classified with regard to relative density, strength characteristics, sensitivity, consistency
limits, consolidation characteristics and frost activity.
TABLE 8.
Classification of coarsegrained soils according to relative density and penetration resistance
(i) Noncohesive soils. In noncohesive soils, the shear strength is derived partly from
friction between the grains and partly from dilation energy. T h e dilation energy which is
c o n s u m e d in the shearing of dense material has a great influence on shear resistance. In
m e d i u m dense material, the influence of dilation energy is negligible. In such a case, the
soil is said to be in a state of critical density. In loose soils w e h a v e to deal with negative
dilation.
Coarsegrained soils are typically noncohesive. However, cementation between the
grains as well as capillary forces can give rise to apparent cohesion. A l t h o u g h the effect
of apparent cohesion m a y be very useful, it rarely can b e taken into account in the design
of foundations.
(ii) Cohesive soils. Cohesive soils are characterised by the fact that the shear strength is
due to both friction (between coarser grains and between aggregates that are formed by
clay particles) and cohesion within the material (through the action of sorption forces or
organic c o m p o n e n t s ) .
Clay and organic mineral soils are typically cohesive. Since it is not possible to
determine the relative density of these types of soil, w e c h o o s e instead to group them
according to shear strength properties, determined under undrained condition, the so
called undrained shear strength cu (or Tfu). T h u s , the soil can b e said to b e very soft if cu
< 20 kPa, soft if 2 0 < cu < 4 0 kPa, firm if 4 0 < cu < 75 kPa, stiff if 75 < cu < 150 kPa and
very stiff if cu > 150 kPa.
Cohesive soils are also classified according to their sensitivity, i.e. the ratio between
the undrained shear strength of a specimen in undisturbed and in r e m o u l d e d states.
Sensitivity is very important for the estimation of h o w m u c h the undrained shear strength
may decrease in a case of disturbance, for instance d u e to piling. T h e sensitivity is m o s t
easily determined by m e a n s of the fallcone test. Soils are termed slightly sensitive w h e n
the sensitivity St < 8, moderately sensitive w h e n 8 < St < 30 and highly sensitive w h e n
St > 30. Clays with St > 50 are called quick clays (cf. Fig. 2 1 , p. 34).
Soil classification 47
(iii) Intermediary soils. Silt and composite soils (content of fines 1540 wt% of total
material < 60 m m ) occupy, from the point of view of strength, an intermediate position
between noncohesive and cohesive soils. T h u s , the shear strength is due to both
frictional and cohesive resistance.
4.3 Consistency
Fig. 29. Determination of the percussion liquid limit. To the left, the groove has just been formed. To
the right, the groove has flown together 13 mm lengthwise.
48 So/7 classification
Fig. 30. Determination of the fallcone liquid limit is generally performed by using a 60g/60 cone. To
the left, the cone is adjusted before being dropped. To the right, after the cone has been released and
penetrated into the soil.
Soil classification 49
TABLE 9
Classification of finegrained soils on a basis of plasticity
Nonplastic < 1
Low plasticity <35 17
Intermediate plasticity 3550 717
High plasticity 5070 1735
Very high plasticity 7090 3550
Extremely high plasticity >90 >50
IP = wL wP (39)
is called the plasticity index,
and the ratio: W ~Wp W Wp
(40)
WL Wp
(ii) Classification on the basis of plasticity chart. A s pointed out in Section 3 . 1 , the
division of finegrained soils is often m a d e internationally according to plasticity
properties on a basis of the relation b e t w e e n the liquid limit and the plasticity index.
According to C a s a g r a n d e (1947), the mineral and organic soils fall on either side of the
socalled A Une in the plasticity chart IP vs. wL (Fig. 33).The A line follows the relation
Ip  0 . 7 3 ( w L  20), w h e r e wL (the percussion liquid limit) and IP in %.
50 So/7 classification
10r
Average value: 54%
(a) (b) Standard deviation: 3.0%
_ .is
>
MM J3
a
10
20 25 30 35 45 50 55 60 65
Fig. 31. Statistical variation of the consistency limit w 7 determined in different laboratories, (a) and (b)
represent the percussion liquid limit, (c) and (d) the fallcone liquid limit.
10 15 20 25 20 25 30 35 40
(
Test results, wp
Fig. 32. Statistical variation of the consistency limit wP determined in different laboratories.
So/7 classification 51
Soils with the same geological origin seem to fall within narrow zones, closely parallel
to the A line. However, the A line function itself is not unique but changes with regard
to geological conditions. For Scandinavian finegrained soils, for example, the upper
boundary of organic clay and silt seems to follow the relation IP = 0 . 9 5 ( w L  26) while
that of inorganic clay follows the relation IP = 0 . 8 ( w L  8), where wL = fallcone liquid
limit in %.
The plasticity index divided by the clay content, the socalled activity number, is a
measure of the colloidal activity of clay. The activity number is first of all dependent on
the ion exchange capacity and the specific surface of the clay minerals and on the content
of organic colloids.
In 1952, the US Corps of Engineers and Bureau of Reclamation agreed on a soil desig
nation system, the socalled Unified Soil Classification System (USCS), which has
become the most wellknown and most widely adopted soil designation system throughout
the world. According to this system, the soil should be identified by a group name and
a group symbol, based on certain criteria using results of laboratory tests. According to
U S C S , soils are designated coarsegrained if more than 5 0 % by dry weight of material
with grain size < 75 m m is retained on No 200 sieve (mesh width 0.074 mm) and fine
grained if the corresponding figure is less than 5 0 % . Thus, just as in other classification
systems, coarsegrained soils represent sand and gravel while finegrained soils represent clay
and silt. A more detailed picture is given in Table 10.
Fig. 33. The Casagrande plasticity chart. Soils of equal composition lie in zones more or less parallel
with the A line. The soil classification symbols are those of the USCS (cf. Table 10) determined in
different laboratories.
52 Soil classification
TABLE 10.
USCS. Criteria for assigning group symbols and group names.
Symbol Name
Silts and clays, Inorganic I > 1 and on or above "A" line CL Lean clay
wL < 50% Ip < 4 and below "A" line ML Silt
Organic ^Poven dried^Pnot dried <0.75 OL Organic clay/Organic silt
Silts and clays, Inorganic Ip on or above "A" line CH Fat clay
wL > 50% Ip below "A" line MH Elastic silt
Organic ^Poven dried^Pnot dried <075 OH Organic clay/Organic silt
The symbol O L means organic clay when IP > 4 and on or above the " A " line in the
/ p / w L  d i a g r a m and organic silt when IP< 4 and below the " A " line, while the symbol OH
means organic clay when IP is on or above the " A " line and organic silt when IP is below
the " A " line.
A full description of U S C S can be found in, for example, the 1986 Annual of A S T M
Standards under Designation: D 2487.
Frost penetration into the soil leads to formation of ice crystals which create a pore water
underpressure in the adsorption layers surrounding the particles. As a result of the
underpressure, pore water is sucked up from the environs and concentrated as ice lenses
and/or ice layers in the soil. The inflow of water continues as long as water can penetrate
into the adsorption layers between the particles and the growing ice crystals. The ice
crystals continue to grow as long as the inflow of water can keep pace with the ice
formation. The thickness of the water film between the grains and the ice crystals in which
the water is moving is independent of the grain size. Therefore, the total flow area is much
smaller in frozen coarsegrained material than in frozen finegrained material, which
reduces the possibility of water flow into the frozen zone. Consequently, coarsegrained
soils are not subjected to frost heave due to suction of water from the environs and
So/7 classification 53
formation of ice lenses or ice layers. Finegrained soils, on the other hand, and silt in
particular, are very disposed to frost heave.
T h e frost h e a v e to b e expected obviously depends on the permeability of the soil
beneath the frozen z o n e and on the grain size in the frozen z o n e as well as on the rate of
penetration of the frost.
Classification of soils with regard to frost activity can be m a d e as follows:
G r o u p I  Frostinsusceptible soils, characterised by insignificant frost h e a v e and ice
formation, and b y insignificant softening during thawing. R o u g h l y speaking, this group
covers coarsegrained mineral soils and organic soils.
Group  Moderately frostsusceptible soils, characterised by m o d e r a t e frost heave
in normal conditions, and b y m o r e or less softening of the soil during thawing. R o u g h l y
speaking, this group covers the mixedgrain soils and clays, except silty clays.
G r o u p III  Strongly frostsusceptible soils, characterised by normally significant
frostheave and by severe softening during thawing. R o u g h l y speaking, this group covers
silt soils and silty clays.
A diagram for the determination of frostsusceptibility based on grain size distribution
has been presented in a w o r k report 1 9 8 5  1 9 8 9 by the I S S F M E Tecnical C o m m i t t e e on
frost (Fig. 34).
Grain size d, mm
Fig. 34. Determination of frostsusceptibility of a soil on the basis of the grain size curve. Region 1L
corresponds to group II (moderately frostsusceptible soils) and region 1 to group III (strongly frost
susceptible soils). If the grain size curve falls inside either of regions 24 the soil belongs to group II
(frostinsusceptible soils). However, if the lower part of the grain size curve permanently passes the the
next region on the finer side, the soil belongs to group IIIII. (ISSMFE Technical Committee on Frost).
54 So/7 classification
5. D I S C O N T I N U I T I E S A N D B E D D I N G
5.1 Discontinuities
TABLE 11
Terms for the designation of discontinuity spacing.
5.2 Bedding
Bedding is another factor of great importance for the engineering behaviour of soil. As
was the case with the Furre slide event, undetected finegrained layers e m b e d d e d in
coarsegrained soil m a y entail unforeseen risks of failure. Coarsegrained layers in fine
grained soil represent another e x a m p l e . T h e s e generally provide drainage paths which
govern the rate of settlement induced by loading.
T h e terms r e c o m m e n d e d by ISO for the designation of bedding are given in Table 12.
TABLE 12
Terms for designation of bedding thickness.
ROCK CLASSIFICATION
1 ROCK IDENTIFICATION
TABLE 13
Rock identification for engineering purposes.
Chalk, clastic limestone, crystalline limestone and dolomite, evaporites, coal and
lignite also belong to the group of sedimentary rocks. T h e s e h a v e a grain size in the whole
range shown in Table 13.
Fossils m a y b e found in sedimentary rocks. T h e mineral calcite in calcareous rocks
m a y b e scratched with knife and will react with dilute hydrochloric acid. Quarts scratches
steel. B r o k e n crystals in crystalline rocks reflect light.
T h e r o c k to b e identified is best seen in outcrop or as large fragments showing broken
surfaces.
2 ROCK MASS
TABLE 14
Examples of terms used in the description of rock mass structure.
2.2 Weathering
TABLE 15
Classification with regard to compressive strength of rock material.
2.4 Discontinuities
TABLE 16
Terms to describe bedding and foliation spacing.
Term Spacing, mm
TABLE 17
Terms to describe mechanical discontinuity spacing,
Term Spacing, mm
TABLE 18
Terms for description of discontinuity aperture.
0.52.5 mm Open
2 . 5  1 0 mm Moderately wide 'Gapped' features
> 10 mm Wide
(iii) Infilling. Identification of the infilling material in the apertures and determination of
its shear strength are important for the j u d g e m e n t of the stability of the rock mass.
(iv) Water seepage. Possible existence of free moisture or water flow is another important
factor to b e taken into account and has, therefore, to be reported.
60 So/7 investigations
SOIL I N V E S T I G A T I O N S
1. OBJECT
2. P E N E T R A T I O N T E S T S
(i) SPT In the standard penetration test, a splitbarrel sampler is driven from the b o t t o m
of a prebored h o l e into the soil by m e a n s of a 63.5 kg h a m m e r , d r o p p e d freely from a
height of 0.76 m. T h e sampler (Fig. 36) has a length of 457 m m , an outer diameter of 51
m m and an inner diameter of 35 m m . T h e diameter of the prebored hole varies normally
b e t w e e n 6 0 and 2 0 0 m m . If the h o l e does not stay open by itself, casing or drilling m u d
should b e used. T h e sampler is first driven to a depth of 0.15 m b e l o w the b o t t o m of the
prebored hole, then the n u m b e r of blows required to drive the sampler another 30 c m into
the soil, the socalled N30 count, is recorded. T h e rods used for driving the sampler should
h a v e sufficient stiffness. Normally, w h e n sampling is carried out to depths greater than
around 15 m, 5 4 m m rods are used.
T h e S P T has the advantage over other sounding m e t h o d s in that it provides samples,
certainly disturbed but still m a k i n g a classification of the soil possible and it suits
practically all types of soils. However, it m a y b e t i m e  c o n s u m i n g and e x p e n s i v e to
perform unless c h e a p labour is available.
511 mm
coupling
4 vents, 13 mm
diameter, min.
split tube
driving shoe M
1.6 mm 351 mm
As can be seen from Table 19, the main difference between the various methods is the
driving energy. T h e r e c o m m e n d e d driving rate is 30 blows per m i n u t e but up to 60 blows
per minute can b e used in noncohesive soils. In cohesive soils, however, the rate should
not exceed 30 blows per minute. T h e n u m b e r of blows required for every 0.2 m of
penetration is recorded in the site log.
TABLE 19
Data on various dynamic probing methods.
32 m m
320.3 m m
solid or
hollow
45 m m
510.2 m m
fixed or "lost"
I
\ /
90
5 mm
~f
Fig. 37. Dynamic probing equipment, types DPB (left) and HfA.
(i) WST. Weight sounding is a fairly oldfashioned m e t h o d but is still used, particularly
where there is too little space for other sounding m e t h o d s . In weight sounding, a screw
shaped point (Fig. 38) fixed to sounding rods is pushed into the soil by m e a n s of weights,
350.2 m m
22
pushrod
Seal
friction sleeve
(ii) CPT. T h e cone penetration test, in its most modern design, offers excellent possibilities
to classify the subsoil from different aspects in spite of the fact that it does not include
sampling. Several types of c o n e penetrometers exist on the market. A c o m m o n feature
Soil investigations 65
is that the tip is coneshaped with an apex angle of 6 0 (or, m o r e seldom, 90) and a diameter
of 35.7 m m (Fig. 39). It is usually provided with stress transducers which register
electrically the tip resistance and the friction against a friction sleeve. Hydraulic and
mechanical m e a s u r i n g devices exist. According to the standard, the penetrometer tip
should h a v e the s a m e diameter as the cone over a length of 1000 m m a b o v e the cone base.
Moreover, the friction sleeve should be placed immediately above the base of the cone
2
and h a v e a surface area of 150 c m . O n e has to remember, however, that there are
divergencies from the standard r e c o m m e n d e d , both with regard to the diameter of the
cone and to the location and surface area of the friction sleeve.
In its most m o d e r n design, the tip is also provided with a pore pressure transducer
which registers the pore water pressure during penetration the socalled piezocone. In
this case, the penetration test is usually referred to as the C P T U test. T h e p i e z o c o n e offers
excellent possibilities of identifying soil type and soil stratification. It is also a promising
method, based on local experience, of finding realistic values of strength parameters and
deformation moduli as well as consolidation characteristics (see, for e x a m p l e , Senneset
etal, 1989 and p. 103).
T h e cone tip is connected to a pushrod, with the s a m e diameter as the tip (or slightly
smaller) and is pushed into the soil by m e a n s of a thrust m a c h i n e at the r e c o m m e n d e d rate
of penetration of 20 m m per second (1.2 m per minute) T h e pushing force required for
penetration varies, of course, with the soil type, and a n u m b e r of thrusting rigs of various
powers exist.
Based on the C P T results, a report on soil type, relative density and undrained shear
strength in cohesive soils is often included. H o w well these parameters represent the truth
is as yet an open question.
3. GEOPHYSICAL METHODS
Source of vibration
S wave J R wave
Spherical propagation Circularcylindrical propagation
along ground surface
Fig. 40. The different modes of soil particle movement induced by a shock at the ground surface. The
longitudinal and the transversial S waves spread spherically while the R wave moves in circles along
the ground surface.
(42)
s i n a /sin/3 = v lv
x 2
w h e r e = angle of incidence,
= angle of refraction,
v 1 = w a v e velocity in m e d i u m 1,
v 2 = w a v e velocity in m e d i u m 2.
If in a three layer m e d i u m 13 (Fig. 41) the w a v e velocities v 3 > v 2 > vh then for
certain limiting angles of incidence oc lr and o^r > the values in m e d i a 2 and 3 b e c o m e
Medium 3
Fig. 41. Principles of the seismic refraction method in a three layer medium with v 3 > v 2 > v t . The fastest
wave propagation lines from the shock point to the respective geophones indicated.
So/7 investigations 67
E c h o sounding is often used for the determination of the soil layer s e q u e n c e beneath sea
or lake b o t t o m s . It provides not only direct information about the b o t t o m profile but also,
to a certain extent, the transition from one soil layer to another. It m a y also b e possible
to discern the b e d r o c k profile if it is not too deep below the soil surface. T h e depth of
penetration and resolving p o w e r depend upon the frequency applied. With m o d e r n
instruments, and under favourable conditions, changes in soil strata can b e observed to
depths of 2 0  3 0 m .
Ever since the evolution of the effective stress concept, p o r e pressure prognostications
and m e a s u r e m e n t s h a v e been considered imperative. Nevertheless, soil investigations
and geotechnical reports h a v e contained very little information about groundwater
68 Soil investigations
_ Onein. pipe
. Test adaptor
_ Hypodermic needle
. Filter tip
a solenoid and attached to a bellows connected with the filter stone. T h e frequency of the
string is registered by m e a n s of sound w a v e s through the sounding rods and thus no
connecting cables are required. T h e results are stored digitally in a solid state memory.
In practice, in most occasions, satisfactory information about the pore pressure
situation is obtained by the use of open standpipes with filter tips. T h e m o r e advanced
piezometers are required w h e n it is important to study q u i c k pore pressure changes.
5. S A M P L I N G
Sampling is normally carried out on the basis of the results of penetration tests
(sounding). Sampling is necessary to ensure a m o r e accurate soil classification than that
which is possible on the basis of sounding alone. Sampling is also d o n e for the purpose
of laboratory investigations of the strength and deformation characteristics. This is
particularly important in the case of cohesive soils w h e r e consolidation tests on
undisturbed samples are the only m e a n s of investigating the characteristics required for
analysis of longterm settlement. In cohesionless soils, undisturbed sampling is not
possible. It is, therefore, questionable if laboratory testing of samples of cohesionless
soils will yield strength and deformation parameters of any practical use.
Details about different samplers and methods of sampling from all over the world, with
special emphasis on their application to undisturbed sampling of soft cohesive soils, are
given in an international m a n u a l , prepared by an I S S M F E s u b  c o m m i t t e e on soil
sampling and published by Tokai University Press, Tokyo, in 1981.
(i) Intermittent sampling. T h e special samplers designed for the p u i p o s e of causing the
least possible disturbance during sampling share a c o m m o n feature. T h e y are socalled
thinwalled samplers with fixed pistons. T h e s e consist essentially of a sampler head, a
piston, piston extension rods and a sampling tube with a cutting edge. T h e sampler is
either pushed into the soil to the intended depth or lowered to the b o t t o m of a prebored
hole. M a n y different m e t h o d s of preboring exist, such as rotatory drilling, percussion
drilling, flight augers and hand augers. T h e choice of m e t h o d depends on the soil
characteristics and the depth of sampling.
T h e principles of the sampling operation in itself are m o r e or less the s a m e for all types
of samplers. In Fig. 4 3 , the sampling operation using the Swedish Standard Piston Sam
pler I is shown as an e x a m p l e . W h i l e the sampler is placed in position for sampling, the
piston is fixed to the sampling tube (Fig. 43a). T h e piston is then released from the
sampling tube and rigidly fixed in relation to the ground surface (Fig. 43b). Finally, the
sampling tube is advanced until it is completely filled with soil (Fig. 43c).
In order to reduce friction between the sample and the walls of the sampling tube duri ng
the sampling operation, the inner diameter of the cutting e d g e can be m a d e slightly
Fig. 43. Principle of undisturbed sampling using the Swedish Standard Piston Sampler I:
(a) Piston locked to the sampling tube while the sampler is inserted into the soil.
(b) Piston rigidly fixed vertically during the sampling operation.
smaller than the inner diameter of the tube k n o w n as inside clearance. Therefore, it is
usually necessary to let the sampler stay in the soil after sampling for about 5 to 10
minutes to give the sample time to swell. (Swelling is d u e to the horizontal p r e s s u r e
release obtained w h e n the sample is punched into the tube). In this w a y e n o u g h adhesion
will b e developed for the sample to be torn off at the tip of the sampler w h e n it is
Soil investigations 71
withdrawn. T h e sample can also be sheared off at the tip by turning the sampler before
it is withdrawn. In s o m e cases, however, it m a y be necessary to use s o m e kind of sample
retainer or to h a v e s o m e arrangement for releasing the v a c u u m effect w h e n the sampler
is withdrawn from the soil. Retainers should be avoided if possible, as they always cause
some disturbance.
T h e inner diameter of the sampling tube varies with the type of sampler from 50 m m
to 100 m m and a length of 8  1 2 times the inside diameter is c o m m o n . T h e Swedish
Standard Piston Samplers h a v e an inner tube divided into three centrally placed 170 m m
lengths and t w o outer 85 m m lengths, i.e. a total sample length of 6 8 0 m m , or 13.6 times
the sample diameter. However, the soil samples in the two outer tubes, the one nearest
to the piston and the other nearest to the cutting edge, are considered as being disturbed.
T h e tubes are m a d e of reinforced plastic and can be used repeatedly. Using the Swedish
method, cutting of the tube in the laboratory is avoided.
A good sampler should fulfil certain requirements with regard to inside clearance ratio,
2 2 2
(^), arearatio, (D2 Dl )/Di , and e d g e taper angle (Fig. 44). T h e r e c o m m e n d e d
inside clearance ratio depends on the diameter of the sampling tube and on the type of soil.
In s o m e countries, inside clearance is not considered necessary. T h e r e c o m m e n d e d edge
taper angle depends on the area ratio; the higher the area ratio, the smaller the angle. M o s t
of the samplers h a v e an area ratio of about 1 0  2 0 % and an e d g e taper angle of 5  1 0
degrees. (The Swedish piston sampler, for e x a m p l e , which is considered to yield high
quality samples of soft cohesive soils, has an area ratio of 21 % and an e d g e taper angle
of 5 degrees. T h e inside clearance ratio is 0.4%).
. Fastening of foils
. Foil magazine
If the only purpose of sampling is to classify the soil, undisturbed sampling m a y not b e
required. It is also m o r e or less impossible to carry out such sampling by conventional
m e t h o d s in the case of noncohesive soils.
Soil investigations 73
T h e r e are a great n u m b e r of m e t h o d s used for taking disturbed samples, one of the most
c o m m o n m e t h o d s being the standard penetration test. A u g e r boring and core boring are
other c o m m o n methods of obtaining disturbed samples. Representative disturbed samples
can also b e obtained by the use of thickwalled rugged piston samplers. For shallow
sampling of hard soil, digging test pits is often the easiest and m o s t e c o n o m i c solution.
6. D E T E R M I N A T I O N O F D E F O R M A T I O N P R O P E R T I E S
T h e loading conditions are very important for the response characteristics of the ground.
Normally, soil investigations are carried out with the a i m of determining the properties
of the soil in static loading conditions. However, the u n d e r g r o u n d r e s p o n s e in d y n a m i c
loading is m o s t probably very different from the response in static loading. T h e under
lying causes of deviation between soil behaviour in static and d y n a m i c loadings are
differences in m a g n i t u d e of deformations and time effects. On o n e hand, the m a g n i t u d e
of the amplitude of shear deformation in d y n a m i c loading is generally m u c h smaller than
in static loading and, on the other hand, the loading conditions are quite different (gen
erally cyclic loads of short duration).
In static loading, both strength and deformation properties are governed by consolidation
(hydraulic time lag) and creep p h e n o m e n a . L o n g  t e r m effects on strength and strain in
d y n a m i c loading are mainly due to the n u m b e r of loading cycles in combination with the
m a g n i t u d e of the amplitudes.
T h e soil can b e either strainsoftening or strainhardening, or b e h a v e like a m o r e or less
ideally elastoplastic material. It can dilate or contract in shear d e p e n d i n g u p o n the den
sity of its structure. Watersaturated granular soils in a loose state easily liquefy in shear.
Liquefaction can also take place in relatively dense soils subjected to longterm d y n a m i c
loading.
Investigations of strength and deformation properties of soil are chosen with due
regard to the the loading condition (static or dynamic), the permeability of the soil and
the possibility of taking undisturbed samples. If the latter is considered possible then
laboratory testing is often chosen, especially in cases w h e r e the soil characteristics are
governed by timebound p h e n o m e n a (e.g. primary and secondary consolidation). If, on
the other hand, undisturbed sampling is not possible, in situ m e t h o d s are preferable.
T h e determination of the strength parameters is associated with a n u m b e r of uncertain
factors. In the case of n o n  c o h e s i v e soils, there is n o possibility of taking undisturbed
samples. Even if it w e r e possible to reestablish the in situ stress condition and the in situ
void ratio, possible cementation forces w o u l d h a v e been destroyed, the soil skeleton
subjected to rearrangement, ageing effects eliminated, etc. M o r e o v e r , considering the
size of soil v o l u m e tested and all the possible heterogeneities that can b e expected in the
underground, the limitations in the results obtained are obvious.
74 Soil investigations
Fig. 46. Direct shear test apparatus. Consolidation phase (a) and shearing phase (b). Before shearing,
the oedometer ring is removed and replaced by the rubber membrane and the metal rings (or by a
reinforced rubber membrane). The horizontal load is applied in steps until failure takes place.
So/7 investigations 75
a<y = ^r
r <>44
a + bea
w h e r e a and b are inverted moduli w h o s e determination is demonstrated in Fig. 4 8 .
Derivation of Eq. (44) in respect of yields the tangent m o d u l u s :
0.5103
 kPa 'Tarct m b
+
0 V
0 12
Axial strain ,%
2
(45)
(\ + eaE0b)
Loading plate
Porous s t o n e 
Floating ring
Soil specimen
consecutive steps is doubled. T h e M value represented by the inch nation of the oedometer
virgin curve is called the primary compression modulus. It m a y have to be corrected with
regard to the influence of sample disturbance (Schmertmann, 1985).
T h e M value is very m u c h dependent on whether or not the effective stresses exceed
the preconsolidation pressure of the soil specimen (Fig. 50). A correct evaluation of the
preconsolidation pressure is of paramount importance and an uncritical determination of
G'C according to the Casagrande method must be warned against. T h u s , the outlook of the
compression curve in the semilogarithmic plot of a disturbed clay specimen may
indicate the existence of a preconsolidation pressure although in reality no sign of a
preconsolidation pressure exists (Fig. 51).
As mentioned previously (p. 25), the primary compression index Cc  AelA(\ogo\),
introduced by Terzaghi, is frequently used in settlement analysis instead of M. Still another
deformation modulus, often used in settlement analysis, is 2 representing the compression
obtained w h e n doubling the consolidation pressure. T h e relation between these moduli
CR = Cc/(l+e0) = 2/\og2 is usually termed the compression ratio.
2.5 1 1 1 1
&
' L  'c 1 _ ('  ' )m _ ,
<
+
+ ln[l + ] ' = 0 + '
/ XiL m ML
M0 1 1
03 4
0. &c  '  &c ,
/
=  + if &c < ' < a'L
I
C/5 I 1
\
D
I _ '  '0
'B
I if ' = 0 + ' <&c
\
WH
1
<u >r m
<U
1
1
! ^ ' 1
50 / 150 200
Effective vertical pressure ', kPa
Fig. 50. Correlation between M and effective overburden pressure "(Sllfors and Larsson, 1981 ; Larsson
and Sllfors, 1986).
78 Soil investigations
1 1
0.8 L I 1 1 1
0 20 40 80 160 320
Effective pressure & v, in kPa (lin. scale)
Fig. 51. Oedometer test result taken from a consultant's report. The consultant evaluated the precon
solidation pressure in the semilog. plot at 80 kPa (according to Casagrande's method). By rewriting
the oedometer curve in linear scale we realise that there is no visible sign of a preconsolidation pressure.
In the conventional oedometer of the type shown in Fig. 4 9 , the soil layer submitted
to consolidation is drained at both top and bottom. Moreover, it can b e a s s u m e d that the
initial excess pore pressure u0 is constant throughout the specimen. A s s u m i n g that the
specimen has a thickness of 2h, the average consolidation degree {7V av can b e expressed
2
in terms of the time factor Tv cv tlh through the relation:
w h e n Tv < 0.2,
f/ v av = 1 _ 0.81 l e x p (  2 . 4 6 8 T v ) (48)
This gives us a basis for the determination of the coefficient of consolidation cv (Fig. 52).
N o w a d a y s , oedometer tests are often carried out by m e a n s of "constant rateofstrain"
oedometer tests, socalled C R S tests. In this case the specimen is undrained at the b o t t o m ,
and the pore pressure at the impervious base of the specimen, induced during consolidation,
is registered. T h e coefficient of consolidation is evaluated from the relation:
So/7 investigations 79
_dd_\?_
(49)
dt 2ub
Time of consolidation t
24 h
Load steps
0  1 0 kPa
1 0  2 0 kPa
2 0  + 4 0 kPa
4 0  80 kPa
 1 6 0 kPa
Fig. 52. Evaluation of the coefficient of consolidation from the results of oedometer tests with step by
2
step increase of consolidation pressure. For Uv = 50%, Tv = 0.197 which yields c v = 0 . 1 9 7 / i 5 O / i 5 O.
80 So/7 investigations
Direct in situ determinations of the deformation characteristics of soils can be carried out
in several w a y s , for instance by pressuremeter tests or dilatometer tests, and of course
by fullscale or halfscale loading tests. T h e deformation properties of soil under dynamic
loading conditions are c o m m o n l y determined by seismic m e t h o d s .
(i) The pressuremeter test. A m o n g the different in situ m e t h o d s , the pressuremeter has
proven to b e a most reliable tool for the determination of the deformation characteristics
of various types of coarsegrained soil and rock as well as overconsolidated finegrained
soil. T h e pressuremeter (for details, see Baguelin et al, 1978), which was developed as
a practical tool by the French engineer Louis Mnard, consists of a cylindrical body with
originally three cellsa central measuring cell and two guard cells (Fig. 53). N o w a d a y s ,
pressuremeters with only one cell (a measuring cell), long enough to ensure that the end
effects are negligible, are also utilised.
After the pressuremeter is installed in the soil, the pressure in the cell(s) is increased,
which brings about a state of cylindrical expansion of the soil surrounding the measuring
cell. T h e radial deformation of the outer boundary of the measuring cell, according to the
M n a r d procedure, is obtained directly from the amount of water that is inflated into the
cell. T h e cell pressure is increased in steps and kept constant during each step for 2
Pressure gauge
minutes. Readings are taken after 30, 60, and 120 seconds. T h e readings h a v e to be
corrected with regard to the stiffness of the measuring device itself. T h e corrected
pressure vs. creep deformation from 30 to 120 seconds is plotted together with the
corrected pressure vs. total deformation (after 120 seconds) in a diagram of the type
shown in Fig. 54.
T h e results of pressuremeter investigations are greatly influenced by the installation
technique. To avoid disturbance in the best possible way, the M n a r d pressuremeter is
generally installed in the soil in a carefully prebored hole of the s a m e diameter as the
pressuremeter. However, in difficult soil conditions direct insertion inside a driven
slotted tube m a y b e necessary. A comparison between the pressuremeter moduli obtained
with and without the use of the slotted tube shows quite different results above, but no
significant difference beneath, the groundwater level. In dense and m e d i u m dense sand,
the moduli obtained without the use of the slotted tube h a v e been shown to vary from
about 40 to 7 5 % of the moduli obtained by its use (Hansbo and Pramborg, 1990). In the
literature it is clearly stated that direct insertion inside a slotted tube should be resorted
to only after all other m e t h o d s of installation h a v e failed. This, in m y opinion, is an
overstatement considering the costs involved in each unsuccessful trial. In Sweden, for
example, direct insertion inside a slotted tube has b e c o m e the rule rather than the
exception, and the results obtained have yielded settlement values that h a v e shown
acceptable agreement with those observed in practice.
In the evaluation of the pressuremeter test, the soil is assumed to b e h a v e as an elastic
medium. Since, in such a case, the stresses induced in the soil are of deviatoric character
the pressuremeter test e a r n e d out in a prebored hole yields the shear m o d u l u s :
82 Soil investigations
Av +v )(v + v )
c m t m (51)
(ii) Dilatometer tests. T h e flat dilatometer (Marchetti, 1975) consists of a steel plate with
a thickness of 15 m m , a width of 96 m m , and a length of 2 4 0 m m (Fig. 56). On one of
its sides it is provided with a circular steel m e m b r a n e , 6 0 m m in diameter, flush with the
side. Inside the steel m e m b r a n e there is a pressure c h a m b e r and a distance g a u g e for
Soil investigations 83
V A
96 m m
is therefore mainly used in sand and silt. Under difficult conditions it m a y be advanced
by driving, but then the results should be treated with caution.
T h e evaluation of the dilatometer test is based on two limiting pressure values, namely
px representing the pressure required to produce 1.10 m m m o v e m e n t of the m e m b r a n e ,
and p0 being the pressure at zero m o v e m e n t of the m e m b r a n e . A s s u m i n g that the soil
behaves elastically, the dilatometer modulus can be deduced from the relation ( see
discussion by Ekstrm, 1989):
ED = 48A(PlPo) (53)
M=\.\RmED (54)
m 0 . 5 + 21ogtfD > 0 . 8 5 ,
/ ? m 0 . 1 4 + 2 . 3 6 1 o g t f D > 0.85.
, _P\ Po
iD  ,
Po  "o
and u0 = pore water pressure at rest (no excess pore pressure),
Ovo
= effective overburden pressure.
T h e ID value varies from about 0.6 to 1.8 for silt and is above 1.8 for sand. For normally
consolidated soil KD ~ 2.5. If KD > 2.5 it is r e c o m m e n d e d that the ID value b e corrected.
T h e correction to b e m a d e depends upon the depth of investigation.
For depths < 2 m :
IiD(corr) = / D  0 . 0 7 5 ( t f D  2 . 5 ) .
D(corr) = / D 0 . 0 3 5 ( ^ D 2 . 5 ) .
T h e correction of the m e a s u r e d ID value in the case of sand and silt is generally of minor
importance.
T h e dilatometer is sometimes utilised as a m e a n s of determining the deformation prop
erties of overconsolidated clays. However, the results are difficult to interpret as they
represent a partly u n d r a i n e d condition.
(iii) Plate loading tests. Plate loading tests, to full or r e d u c e d scale, are sometimes
considered the best m e a n s of determining the deformation characteristics of soils, but are
only used in exceptional cases b e c a u s e of the costs involved. T h e best w a y of performing
these tests is to use a testing procedure in w h i c h the load is applied in steps of equal
duration. First the failure load m a y be estimated on a theoretical basis. T h e n the load m a y
be applied in steps of about 5  1 0 % of the theoretical failure load. R e a d i n g s of the
settlement m a y b e taken 1, 2, 4, 8, and 16 minutes after the application of each new load
step. B y plotting the creep settlement from 1 to 16 minutes against the load, the critical
load can b e interpreted in a w a y similar to that used in the p r e s s u r e m e t e r test (see Fig. 54,
p. 81). T h e determination of the critical load which leads to excessive creep settlement
is j u s t as important as the determination of the failure load.
T h e settlement s observed at a certain load per unit area q (below the critical load) in
a plate loading test can b e used for the determination of the pseudoelastic m o d u l u s of
elasticity of the soil according to the relation:
2
K(\V )qD
E 55
= 4s <>
2
0.815(1 v )qb/s (56)
nearest below the plate (to a depth of approximately five times the plate width or plate
diameter, cf. pp. 1 4 1  1 4 4 ) .
Plate loading tests using smallscale plates are frequently e a r n e d out. With regard to
normal variations in soil properties, the width of such plates should not be below 0.6 m
(cf. Fig. 2 5 , p. 3 6 ) . T h e socalled field compressometer developed at the N o r w e g i a n
Technical University (Janbu and Senneset, 1973) belongs to a special category of plate
loading tests that can b e carried out at various depths below the ground surface.
M 0 = p v p2 (57)
Oscilloscope Oscilloscope
Input rg Trigger
Trigger
geophonc Hammer impulse
Impulse
* S c r e w plate
Receiver geophones
Fig. 57. Downhole and holetohole methods for determination of the dynamic shear modulus of soil.
So/7 investigations 87
whether the soil is above or below the groundwater level. T h e shear m o d u l u s is obtained
from the relation:
2
G0 = pvs (58)
where as above.
T h e shear w a v e velocity can be determined directly in boreholes by socalled down
hole (alternatively uphole) or crosshole techniques (Fig. 57). All these m e t h o d s com
prise a shock i m p u l s e generator (anything from an ordinary h a m m e r to an explosive), a
pickup (for e x a m p l e m o u n t e d in a seismic cone of the type developed at the University
of British C o l u m b i a ) and a registration instrument (normally an oscilloscope). By
generating shock w a v e s with inverted w a v e amplitudes, the shear w a v e velocity can be
determined with great accuracy.
T h e d y n a m i c shear m o d u l u s can also be obtained by measuring the surface w a v e (the
Rayleigh w a v e ) velocity from the relation:
G0~U5pvR* (59)
v*=A? (60)
(i)Stress correlations. As previously shown (Fig. 17, p. 29), the stress history of the soil
is of utmost importance for its deformation characteristics in static loading condition. T h e
most important parameter which has to be k n o w n in order to m a k e possible an accurate
prediction of foundation settlement is the preconsolidation pressure oc'. A drastic change
in longterm volumetric strain takes place w h e n the preconsolidation pressure is
exceeded. Of course, the stress history has also a similar effect upon the longterm shear
strains taking place in loading, i.e. upon the shear m o d u l u s to b e applied in the analysis.
88 So/7 investigations
Consequently, it is important to k n o w both the vertical and the horizontal stress histories
in relation to the actual vertical and horizontal stress levels.
T h e effective octahedral stress level c f o c i has also a certain influence on the magnitude
of the shear m o d u l u s G 0 (see, for example, Hardin and Richart, 1963; Hardin and Black,
1969). Hardin and Richart investigated the shear w a v e velocity for sands with different
void ratios. For sands with rounded and sharpedged grains, respectively, the following
correlations w e r e established:
m
vs = 160(2.17 e)() (61)
O r
1 M
vs = 110(2.97  0 ( ) (62)
( 2 7 g )
G0  3 2 0 ^ ~ \/& (64)
1+ e
r & oa
G 0 = 625(OCR)*' ^ (65)
Fig. 58. Overconsolidation adjustment parameter k' as a function of plasticity index IP.
/= ^ (67)
0.11+0.37/p
(ii) Strength correlations. For normally and lightly overconsolidated clays of high to
m e d i u m plasticity, Larsson and M u l a b d i c ' (1991) r e c o m m e n d the empirical relation:
10000
100
50
101 I I I I
7 6 5 4 3
    io
Shear strain amplitude
Fig. 59. Empirical correlation between G/cu and ^according to Larsson ( 1986) and Larsson & Mulabdic (1991).
90 So/7 investigations
G 0  (208//p + 2 5 0 ) c u (68)
or, alternatively,
G0=504c> L
(69)
2
G 0  6cu + 500cM (70)
24
a i
\ \ * (X
20
16
\ OCR= 10
V \
12 \ \
\ \ \
s
OCR= 1
0
200 300 500 1000 2000 3000
Fig. 60. Correlation between G 0 and cone penetration resistance qc for quartz sand (Jamiolkowski and
Robertson, 1988).
Soil investigations 91
origin, grain size, cementation effects and stress history of the soil, show great dispersion,
particularly with reference to the S P T penetration resistance.
According to Imai et al. (1982), a rough estimate of the shear m o d u l u s G 0 , based on
comparison b e t w e e n S P T resistance and shear w a v e velocities, can b e obtained from the
relation (Imai et al, 1982):
G 0 14.1(N 3 0)068MPa (71)
a) b)
Fig. 61. Active (a) and passive (b) triaxial tests. In the active test = { and Gr  3 while in the passive
test  3 and =
c
l = ^(
 = [a + ^(cfa + efr)] sin ' (73)
3 sin '
q = (p' + a) (74)
3  sin '
Fig. 62. Effective stress paths obtained in active and passive triaxial tests on organic sulphide silt. The
marks on the curves represent axial strains 0 , 0 . 2 , 0 . 5 , 1, 2 and 3%. The 'failure lines' correspond to an
internal angle of friction of '= 35 (a = 0).
sine'
q = (&r + ah "", (76)
1  sin
in the active test, and:
sine'
q = fr + a) ^ (77)
1 + sin 0
}
" Failure surface
deformations at right angles to the direction of shear failure are prevented and consequently
w e have to deal with a plain strain condition which is often in better a g r e e m e n t with real
conditions in practice.
T h e testing principle is as follows: T h r e e specimens are selected and consolidated
under three different normal (vertical) stresses and then sheared to failure at a rate of
strain that has to b e adjusted with regard to the permeability of the soil (the rate of excess
pore pressure dissipation).
During the test, the principal stresses are undergoing a c h a n g e in both direction and
magnitude which m a k e s the interpretation of the test extremely difficult. T h u s , the i n t e r 
pretation of the results in respect of angle of internal friction will depend on the quotient
= \\ at failure which is u n k n o w n . A s s u m i n g that the main principle stress rotates
the angle a, the failure condition can b e expressed by the relation (Hansen, 1961):
sin0 ' s i n 2 a
(78)
a + <fv 1 + sin ' c o s 2
where is the horizontal shear stress at failure and a'v is the normal vertical stress.
Expressed in terms of the quotient K, the friction angle is obtained from the relation:
sin0' = (79)
a +
If in the simple shear test the occurrence of failure is not clear, failure can be assumed
to take place at a relative displacement between the piston plate and the b o t t o m plate of
about 5 % of the height of the specimen.
As mentioned above, the rate of shear deformation must be adjusted with regard to the
permeability of the soil, so in the case of clays it has to be kept very low. For e x a m p l e ,
for a highplasticity clay specimen with a height of 20 m m and a diameter of 5 0 m m , the
Soil investigations 95
'
Fig. 64. Determination of failure criterion on the basis of the Mhr stress circles.
rate of relative displacement between the bottom plate and the top piston plate should not
3
exceed mm/min.
(ii) Determination of total strength parameters. If the tests are performed in such a way
that the effective stresses cannot b e determined then the results can only b e used as a
m e a s u r e of the socalled total strength parameters c and . This is, for e x a m p l e , the case
when the soil is not fully watersaturated, because if the soil contains pore gas the
effective stresses will be affected by surface tension forces of u n k n o w n m a g n i t u d e in the
menisci of the p o r e water. T h e total strength parameters are of practical interest when
failure can be assumed to take place under undrained condition. The most common
laboratory m e t h o d s of determination are the triaxial test, the unconfined compression
test, and the fallcone test. By using either of the unconsolidated undrained triaxial test,
the unconfined compression test or the fallcone test, only the undrained shear strength
parameter cu (or TjU), valid for the prevailing consolidation pressure of the specimen, can
be determined. If, for s o m e reason, the undrained shear strength at various consolidation
pressures is needed, then a n u m b e r of specimens first have to be consolidated in the
triaxial test cells at different pressures and then loaded to failure u n d e r undrained
conditions in the triaxial apparatus.
In the active unconsolidated undrained triaxial test, the specimen is loaded axially to
failure under undrained conditions with a cell pressure preferably equal to in situ
horizontal pressure. In the passive test, the specimen is loaded radially to failure under
undrained conditions with an axial pressure equal to in situ vertical pressure. Since the
effective stress path is u n k n o w n , the results are generally used as a basis for drawing the
M h r circles at failure (Fig. 64). T h e inclination of the failure envelope represents the
apparent angle of friction , and the intercept on the deviatoric stress axis represents the
apparent cohesion c. For watersaturated soil, w e find = 0 and in this case c is usually
denoted cu.
In the unconfined compression test (Fig. 65), the specimen, generally with its height
twice its diameter, is placed between a top and a b o t t o m plate and loaded axially to failure.
96 Soil investigations
h =2d
///////////,
T h e test is merely a special case of the triaxial test with the radial pressure or equal to zero
and can evidently only b e used in the case of cohesive soils, preferably clay. It can either
be e a r n e d out with a constant rate of axial deformation or by continuously increasing
axial loading. T h e rate of axial strain ought to b e approximately 2.5%/min. In order to
prevent dessication of the specimen, it m a y be necessary to h a v e it enclosed by a sub
stance such as paraffin oil.
T h e axial failure load is normally obtained from the m a x i m u m value of the load/
deformation curve. If there is no such m a x i m u m value, failure can b e assumed to have
taken place at an axial strain of 10%. T h e undrained shear strength, as given by the M h r
circle, is cu = 12.
T h e most simple and also the quickest testing m e t h o d is the fallcone test (Fig. 66). T h e
test w a s developed by the Geotechnical C o m m i s s i o n of the Swedish State Railways (SJ:
Geotekniska K o m m i s s i o n e n , 1 9 1 4  1 9 2 2 ) . It is performed by letting a coneshaped
weight (the fallcone) fall freely from a certain height on to the plane surface of a cohesive
specimen. T h e penetration of the cone into the specimen is a m e a s u r e of the undrained
shear strength.
T w o standard cones are generally used for the determination of the undrained shear
strength of undisturbed samples, namely a 100g/30cone (i.e. with a m a s s of 100 g r a m m e s
and an apex angle of 3 0 degrees), and a 60g/60cone. S o m e t i m e s , in the case of very stiff
clays, a 4 0 0 g / 3 0  c o n e is utilised. For determination of the r e m o u l d e d shear strength, a
10g/60cone is also used. T h e cone is normally placed in a position with its tip j u s t in
Soil investigations 97
Fig. 66. The Swedish fallcone test. A 100 g/30 cone placed in position to be dropped.
contact with the p l a n e surface of the specimen (Fig. 66). T h e c o n e is then dropped freely
into the clay and the depth of penetration measured.
T h e undrained shear strength of clay can be obtained by the following relation
(Hansbo, 1957 and 1962):
Km g h
(80)
lL l
Fig. 67. Relation between the parameter and the apex angle of the fallcone.
98 So/7 investigations
w h e r e m  m a s s of the cone,
g = acceleration of gravity,
i  depth of penetration (indentation),
h  distance between cone apex and soil surface when the cone is dropped (nor
mally h  0)
= function of the apex angle of the cone.
If calibrated against the field vane test, for samples taken by m e a n s of the Swedish
standard piston sampler can be taken from Fig. 67.
T h e fallcone test is frequently used as a standard procedure in the determination of the
sensitivity of cohesive soils. T h e results are generally in good agreement with the results
obtained by the field vane test.
As mentioned in the introductory remarks to this paragraph, in situ testing has many
advantages over laboratory testing and has b e c o m e increasingly popular in applied
geotechnical engineering. In situ testing can either be used for determination of the
strength parameters to be used as input data in bearing capacity formulae, as was the case
in laboratory testing, or for direct determination of bearing capacity. Tests which allow
the latter type of interpretation are usually preferable in practical applications. A m o n g the
most c o m m o n in situ m e t h o d s w e find the field vane test, used to determine the undrained
shear strength of cohesive soils, the pressuremeter test, the results of which can be used
both for determining strength parameters and the bearing capacity of foundations, and the
Fig. 68. Field vane test apparatus, type Nilcon (left) and type SGI with protective housing for vane
during installation. Standard vane, 130 mm in height and 65 mm in width.
9
Soil in vestigations
dilatometer toi which can be used both for soil classification purposes and for determining
strength parameters.
2M
u 2 ) ( 8 1
nd h(\+d/3h)
cu = 0.213Mmax/di (82)
If the shear strength is different in the vertical (= cuv) and in the horizontal directions
(= cuh ), w e have: j
2
Mmai = nd h(cuv +cuhd/3h) (83)
(iii) Correction with regard to anisotropy and time to failure. As shown in Section 5.5,
the shear strength mobilised in clay in an undrained condition is dependent on the strain
rate the shorter the time to failure, the higher the mobilised strength (Fig. 69). This is
100 Soil investigations
0 10 20 30 50 70
Torsional angle, degrees
Fig. 69. Shear stress vs. strain relationship in soft highplasticity clay determined by field vane tests with
different rates of vane rotation. Times to failure: (1) 1.2 s, (2) 7 s, (3) 1 min, (4) 10 min, (5) 100 min,
(6) 1000 min and (7) 10000 min (Torstensson, 1973).
particularly the case with clays of high plasticity. Moreover, the strength m a y vary with
the direction of shear deformation because of anisotropic properties of the clay. T h e
undrained shear strength will therefore have to be corrected with regard both to time and
to anisotropy. For soils of extremely high plasticity, the undrained shear strength will only
have to b e corrected with regard to time (cf. Eq. 84). T h e lower limit of the shear strength
Fig. 70. Correction of undrained shear strength with regard to liquid limit (Andrasson, 1974)
continuous lineand plasticity index (Bjerrum, 1973)dashed line.
Soil investigations 101
prevalent in longterm loading is defined as the creep strength ccr (cf. p. 34). T h e correction
factor ^ i s generally related to the plasticity index or, alternatively, to the liquid limit (Fig.
70). T h e value presented as a function of the plasticity index by Bjerrum was based
on results of test e m b a n k m e n t s loaded to failure and on case records. T h e liquid limit has
served as a basis for correction in S w e d e n since the 1950s.
T h e undrained shear strength determined by the field vane test can be corrected with
regard to both time and anisotropy according to the relation (Larsson, 1977):
2 2
c c o s 0 + ( 0 . 1 7 + 0.7vv L) s i n 0
^,corr = : (84)
0.45wL 3
w h e r e 0 i s the inclination of the main principal stress to the vertical [ 0 i s 0in the active
test, 90 in the passive test and 60 in the direct shear test (' assumed equal to 30)].
ol I I I2 I3 I4 I 5
o.i
Time to failure, min.
Fig. 71. Normalised undrained shear strength vs. time to failure for Drammen clay (Bjerrum, 1973).
The creep strength ccr 0.75c M.
102 So/7 investigations
to establish fairly reliable correlations between the results of penetration tests and the
strength parameters.
A m o n g the various penetration methods, the cone penetration test with a friction
sleeve and pore pressure transducers mounted at the tip (the C P T U penetration test)
seems to b e quite a useful tool for determination of the effective strength parameters
(Sandven et , 1988; Senneset et al, 1989). A pore pressure parameter Bq is introduced,
determined from the measured excess pore water pressure AuT and net c o n e resistance
qn (= qT  ' 0) according to the relation:
Bq=AuT/qn (85)
and a cone resistance parameter Nm, determined from the effective overburden pressure
' ^ and the net cone resistance according to the relation:
Nm = qnK^v0 + a) (86)
w h e r e a = attraction.
A s s u m i n g that the failure zone beneath the cone tip is in a g r e e m e n t with the Prandtl
solution for a shallow footing, the cone resistance parameter can b e expressed by the
relation (Sandven et ai, 1988):
Nm = (Nql)/(l+NuBq) (87)
2
w h e r e Nq = tan (45+072)exp(7Ctan0O,
N M 6 t a n 0 ' ( l + tan0O
Introducing the values of Bq and Nm into Eq. (87), the angle of internal friction ' can
be determined (Fig. 72).
If the soil is h o m o g e n e o u s , the attraction a can be obtained directly from the penetration
resistance curve b y extrapolating it to zero overburden pressure. For i n h o m o g e n e o u s
soils, the following values of a (in kPa) m a y b e applied (Sandven et ai, 1988):
5  1 0 for soft clay, 1 0  2 0 for m e d i u m clay and 2 0  5 0 for stiff clay,
0  5 for soft silt, 5  1 5 for m e d i u m silt and 1 5  3 0 for stiff silt,
0 for loose sand, 1 0  2 0 for m e d i u m sand and 2 0  5 0 for dense sand.
8. PRESENTATION
1 2 5 10 20 50 100 150
Cone resistance parameter Nm
Fig. 72. Assessment of effective angle of internal friction from the results of CPTU penetration tests
classification, shear strength values, consistency limits, natural water content, etc.) as
exemplified in Fig. 7 3 .
Presentation of laboratory test results should include all information needed for the
appreciation of the testing routines applied and of the deformation and strength parameters
stated in the report. It should always b e possible to check the results presented. This is
a vital part of a quality assurance system.
An interpretation of the results of the geotechnical investigation should b e presented
in a special geotechnical report aimed at forming a basis for solving the p r o b l e m s which
arise in the foundation project in question.
In order to avoid misinterpretations of the information given in the report, the final
solution to the foundation problems should b e w o r k e d out in close cooperation with the
structural engineers involved in the project as well as other representatives of the client.
T h e situation previously experienced, w h e r e the geotechnical engineer, after having
delivered his report, had no connection at all with the structural engineer or the con
tractor, or the client for that matter, until something w e n t w r o n g with preparatory foun
dation works or d a m a g e caused by excessive settlement took place, has hopefully c o m e
to an end.
104 So/7 investigations
Fig. 73. Example of a borehole section and corresponding inteipretation of subsoil stratification. By
courtesy of J&W. Abbreviations for names of soil according to Karlsson and Hansbo (1981).
Spread foundation 105
SPREAD FOUNDATIONS
1. INTRODUCTION
Spread foundations comprise footings placed at shallow depth for the support of
individual structural columns and walls. A footing that supports a single c o l u m n is called
an individual footing whilst one that supports a group of columns is a c o m b i n e d footing
and one that supports a wall or a row of columns is a strip footing. In soft soil conditions,
and also in s o m e other special cases w h e r e there is a need to reduce the m a x i m u m
foundation pressure, it is advantageous to replace foundation on footings by a c o m m o n
raft designed to carry the total load of the building. In both types of foundation, the load
of the building will h a v e to be carried by direct contact stresses at the footing/soil
interface which places strong requirements on the geotechnical characteristics and
behaviour of the subsoil.
(i) Regional requirements. T h e depth of foundation is not only dependent on the strength
and deformation characteristics of the soil but also on the climatological conditions and
the response to these conditions exerted by the soil. In s o m e places w e encounter soils
that can give rise to serious foundation difficulties, for e x a m p l e soils susceptible to frost
action, soils disposed to swelling, collapsible soils, chemically unstable soils, etc.
In places with frostsusceptible soils, the footings have to be placed below the depth
of frost penetration, or in regions with permafrost below the depth of thawing.
Different m e t h o d s of reducing frost penetration and the depth of thawing can be used,
mostly by insulation or by feeding heat or cold into the soil.
In places with swelling soils, such as smectite, the footings must be located at a depth
that is not influenced by drying. S o m e t i m e s it is necessary to anchor the foundation in
deeper layers to prevent the building from being d a m a g e d when water is sucked up by
the soil during rain seasons. Efficient drainage around the building and protection agai nst
water infiltration is needed.
Residual soils, such as latrites, are often covered by a collapsible top layer. This layer
is ordinarily firm and stable. However, when it b e c o m e s saturated, the soil skeleton
undergoes a complete collapse. Therefore, the footings h a v e to b e placed b e l o w the col
lapsible top layer or the top layer has to be compacted.
Buildings with shallow foundations on clay frequently suffer d a m a g e by differential
106 Spread foundation
settlements caused by watersuction from nearby trees, such as poplars, oaks, birches,
elms and linden trees. In order to avoid d a m a g e , trees should not be planted closer to a
building than its expected fullgrown height.
Building activities often affect the infiltration of rain water and m a y cause a lowering
of the groundwater table. In consequence, settlements can be induced both by dry crust
formation and by longterm increase of effective vertical stresses throughout the soil
profile. T h e dry crust formation is mainly governed by vegetation and other sources of
evaporation. Withering of vegetation starts at a water binding pressure of around 1.5
MPa. This entails that the shrinkage limit is decisive for the m a x i m u m v o l u m e decrease
entailed by dry crust formation.
due to the uplift caused by the combined effect of effective pressure acting at the soil/raft
interface and pore water pressure. Obviously, in this case a raft foundation is always
possible, although in s o m e situations, for instance under heavily loaded c o l u m n s , the raft
may h a v e to b e supported by piles.
(88)
(89)
0.5b
P/b
Fig. 75. Contact pressure distribution beneath a rigid strip footing on an ideally elastic medium
108 Spread foundation
Fig. 76. Observed contact pressure distribution at various loads in stiff clay. Rigid footing, 0.3 m in
diameter, placed on ground surface. (Faber, 1933)
Fig.77. Observed contact pressure distribution at various loads in sand. Rigid footing, 0.3 m in diameter,
2
placed on ground surface without and with a surrounding surcharge of 7 k N / m . (Faber, 1933).
pressure along the e d g e of the footing also close to zero. T h e pressure distribution will
follow the trend s h o w n in Fig. 77.
Usually, b e c a u s e of the footings being placed at a certain foundation depth, whether
this is related to the ground surface or to the b a s e m e n t floor, a certain overburden pressure
is always acting at the foundation level outside the footings. This allows for a higher edge
pressure also for footings on cohesionless soil (Fig. 77, right).
T h e contact pressure distribution for footings on silt is in b e t w e e n the distributions
given for clay and sand (Fig. 78).
B e c a u s e of the various factors that influence the contact pressure distribution, not least
the unforeseen variations in soil properties, effect of capillary forces, cementation, etc.,
it is extremely difficult to predict the real contact pressure distribution induced b y the
load. In practice, however, the structural design of a footing can generally b e e a r n e d out
on the assumption of evenly distributed contact pressure.
(ii) Pressure distribution with depth based on theory of elasticity. T h e variation with depth
of the pressure caused by the load applied on the footing is usually calculated on the basis
of the theory of elasticity. Practical experience has s h o w n that this can be done without
serious errors. Solutions also exist w h i c h are based on statistics w h e r e the soil is
considered as a particulate m e d i u m (see p. 115).
E v e n though the contact pressure distribution under a rigid footing is subjected to large
variations, the difference in stress condition u n d e r n e a t h a rigid footing on the one hand
and a flexible footing on the other is m o r e or less negligible at depths e x c e e d i n g the width
of the footing (Table 20). Therefore, the stress increase occurring at greater depths can
be calculated on the assumption that the contact pressure is equivalent to an evenly
distributed flexible load. O n this basis, the analysis of the stress increase is generally
performed according to Steinbrenner (1936) or N e w m a r k (1942).
110 Spread foundation
Fig. 78. Observed contact pressure distribution at various foundation loads in silt. Rigid footings, 0.31
m in diameter, placed on ground surface and at different depths df. (Helenelund, 1965).
The principal stresses induced by a flexible strip load can be found by the relation (Fig. 79):
q
=  ( y / + s i n ) (90)
T A B L E 20
Stress distribution at depth underneath rigid and flexible strip footings with width b according to the
theory of elasticity (Szechy, 1965).
Fig. 79. Geometric determination of the principal stress at a given point below a flexible strip load.
2q
2  (92)
T U = (  3 ) / 2 =  sin (93)
w h e r e m = lib,
 zlb.
N o w , considering a loaded area that can be divided up into a n u m b e r of part rectangles,
Eq. (94) m a k e s it possible to calculate the vertical stress induced b y the load for any point
and for any depth.
T h e pressure distribution under a load area of arbitrary shape can be obtained by the
Spread foundation 113
Fig. 81. Newmark's influence diagram for determination of vertical stresses under a load area of
arbitrary shape.
114 Spread foundation
Fig. 82. Newmark's influence diagram for determination of horizontal stresses under a load area of
arbitrary shape.
Example 5: Calculate the vertical stress at 2 m depth below points A, and C due to an evenly distributed
load shown on top of p. 115.
Solution: The stress below point A is the sum of the stresses below corner A of the rectangles GHIA (m
=1.5; = 0.5), IJDA (m = 1.0; =0.5) and DEFA (m = 1.0; =0.5) whence:
azA/q = 0.238 + 20.232 = 0.702
The stress below point is the sum of the stresses below corner of the rectangles RGLB (m = 4.0;
= 1.0) plus LHVB (m = 4.0; = 1.0) plus QFKB (m = 3.0; = 1.0) plus PEQB (m = 3.0; = 1.0) plus
VJPB (m = 1.0; = 1.0) minus RAKB (m = 1.0; = 1.0), the effect of which would otherwise be included
twice. Hence:
/ = 0.2042 + 0.2032 + 0.175  0.175 = 0.814
Spread foundation 115
" ^~ ' I
, HI V J1
g
X
G
////////
F
Q 2 m
U  ^
6m 4m
The stress below point C is the sum of the stresses below corner C of the rectangles SGMC (m = 2.2;
= 0.4) plus TFUC (m = 1.8; = 0.4) minus SAUC (m = 1.0; = 0.4) minus TE NC (m = 9.0;  2.0)
minus OHMC (m = 11 ;  2.0) plus OJNC (in  1.0; = 2.0) which would otherwise be deducted twice.
ozClq = 0.244 + 0.244  0.240  0.137  0.137+ 0.084 = 0.058
The stress below point is the sum of the stresses below corner of the rectangles RGLB (in = 4.0;
= 1.0) plus LHVB (m = 4.0; = 1.0) plus QFKB (m = 3.0; = 1.0) plus PEQB (in = 3.0; = 1.0) plus
VJPB (m = 1.0; = 1.0) minus RAKB (m = 1.0;= 1.0), the effect of which would otherwise be included
twice.
azB/q = 0.2042 + 0.2032 + 0.175  0.175 = 0.814
The stress below point C is the sum of the stresses below corner C of the rectangles SGMC (m = 2.2;
= 0.4) plus TFUC (m = 1.8; = 0.4) minus SAUC (m = 1.0; = 0.4) minus TENC (m = 9.0; = 2.0)
minus OHMC (m = 11 ; = 2.0) plus OJNC (m = 1.0; = 2.0) which would otherwise be deducted twice.
ozClq = 0.244 + 0.244  0.240  0.137  0.137+ 0.084 = 0.058
(iii) Probabilistic approach. In the probabilistic approach (cf. p . 479), the soil is consid
ered as a particulate m e d i u m . In such a soil, is zero at any given point located in a void.
T h e real value of in relation to the expected value E(az) can b e calculated b y the
probabitity relation:
/ E ( c )
7 n(lnn)^ ^
p[ (95)
() [/()]\
E(az)=q(^3)(/3) (96)
w h e r e () represents the area below the normal distribution curve from 0 to . They/(x)
value can b e found in standard mathematical tables.
T h e expected vertical stress at any point below a load area of arbitrary shape that can
be divided up into a n u m b e r of rectangular areas can n o w b e calculated by superposition
according to Steinbrenner's m e t h o d as described above.
116 Spread foundation
Example 6: Calculate for the load according to Example 5 the vertical stress to be expected at 2 m depth
below points A and C in a particulate medium.
Solution: The stress below point A is the sum of the stresses below corner A of the rectangles GHIA (//
= 3; biz =2) plus IJDA (l/z = 2; biz =2) plus DEFA (llz = 2; biz =2) whence:
2 2
E(ol )lq = v ( 3 / 3 ) V(2/3) + 2[y/(2/3)] = 0.5 0.5 + 2 0.5 = 0.750
The stress below point C is the sum of the stresses below corner C of the rectangles SGMC (Il = 5.5;
biz = 2.5) plus TFUC (llz = 4.5; biz = 2.5) minus SAUC (l/z = 2.5; biz = 2.5) minus TENC (llz = 4.5;
biz = 0.5) minus OHMC (llz = 5.5; biz = 0.5) plus OJNC (llz = 0.5; biz = 0.5) which would otherwise
be deducted twice. Hence:
2
E(GzC)lq = y/(9.53)y/(4.33) + v<7.79)v<4.33)  [y/(4.33)]  y/(7.79)y/(0.866)  y/(9.53)y/(0.866)
2 2 2
+ [y/(0.866)] = 0.25 + 0.25  0.5  20.50.307 + (0.307) = 0.037
(iv) Empirical method. T h e stress increase below a load area can also be determined
by approximate m e t h o d s . O n e of the most c o m m o n m e t h o d s for determining the stress
increase at various depths below the centre of a load area is the socalled 2:1 method.
According to this method the v o l u m e of stress influence is b o u n d e d by planes inclined
2 (vertical): 1 (horizontal) as shown in Fig. 8 3 . T h e stress distribution in each horizontal
section of the 'stress p y r a m i d ' is assumed to be constant. T h u s , the vertical stress increase
at depth below the centre of a rectangular area with length / and width b under an external
load q  Q/bl is governed by the condition of equilibrium:
7 = (97)
(1 + zll)(\ +zlb)
AOy = (98)
3
(l+z/b)
b +z
Fig. 83. Stress pyramid used for approximate calculation of vertical and horizontal stress increase under
load area.
Spread foundation 111
1 0
y)
y
/A
r
M/
ff
iJb
h
1
II
II
II
Fig. 84. Vertical stress distribution with depth below the centre of square (left) and strip loads. Full line:
2:1 method. Dash line: Rigid footing, theory of elasticity. Dashdot line: Weak load, theory of elasticity.
A comparison of the stress increase below the centre of a square and a strip footing
according to the empirical method to that obtained according to the theory of elasticity
is m a d e in Figs. 8 4  8 5 .
T h e empirical m e t h o d of stress analysis gives results in close a g r e e m e n t with the stress
increase b e l o w the critical point (see p. 142) of a footing according to the theory of elasti
city, Fig. 86.
(i) Contact pressure. In the case of raft foundations, the limited bending rigidity of the
raft will h a v e to b e considered in the analysis of the foundation pressure distribution. It
is also necessary to consider the influence of the deflection of the raft on the internal
Fig. 85. Horizontal stress distribution with depth below the centre of square (left) and strip load areas
according to approximate and strict calculation methods.
118 Spread foundation
Fig. 86. Vertical stress distribution with depth according to theory of elasticity (full lines)below the
characteristic point of a square (left) and a strip footing. Broken lines represents vertical stress
distribution according to the empirical 2:1 method.
m o m e n t s and forces in the superstructure (as is the case with the influence of differential
settlements of individual footings).
M a n y attempts have been m a d e to solve, in a m o r e or less exact way, the pressure
distribution at the soil/raft interface. T h e problem is quite difficult for several reasons:
the pressure distribution is a function not only of the bending rigidity of the raft but
also of the rigidity of the superstructure,
the soil m a y be heterogeneous with varying deformation properties below different
parts of the raft,
the rigidity of the structure is subjected to gradual changes during the time of
construction,
stress changes in the subsoil during the time of construction has a strong influence
on the resulting, final stress distribution.
In respect of all the difficulties involved, we are reduced to finding approximate
solutions to the problem. T h e oldest approach is based on the use of a subgrade coeffi cient
while the m o d e r n approach is based on the utilisation of finite element m e t h o d s and
computerbased solutions.
(i) The subgrade coefficient theory. In the subgrade coefficient approach, it is assumed
that the soil can be replaced by a bed of vertical, elastic springs without horizontal
coupling. In a physical sense, this assumption means that the load does not entail shear
stresses in the soil and that the contact stresses are directly proportional to the vertical
settlements. The contact stress p a t a given point is thus given by the relation:
Spread foundation 119
P = KS (99)
(ii) The subsoil is considered as an elastic medium. In this case, solutions to the problem
are obtained by the aid of the finite element m e t h o d and computeraided calculations. T h e
soil at the foundation level is often divided into finite surface elements which are coupled
to the connecting finite raft elements and to the superstructure. Every raft element is acted
upon by a uniform raft load and the point load exerted by the superstructure. T h e s e loads
are uniformly distributed over the element. T h e elements are first di sconnected from each
other and a settlement analysis is performed. T h e settlement of the element is obtained
by s u m m a t i o n of the vertical deformation of the different layers in the subsoil with due
consideration to the settlement contribution obtained from nearby elements. In the
following step of the analysis, enforced forces and m o m e n t s are applied to the elements
in order to maintain the continuity of the raft in the nodes between the elements. T h e
additional settlements thus obtained are considered in the next step of the analysis, and
so on in an iterative process.
T h e superstructure and the raft and the subsoil can also b e treated as a continuous
system divided into substructures that are analysed b y themselves and then connected
with each other to fulfil the the continuity requirements. T h e soil is then divided into a
n u m b e r of rectangular, trapezoidal or triangular elements in a twodimensional analysis,
or in prismatic or tetrahedral elements in a threedimensional analysis. Now, if the stress/
deformation characteristics can b e correctly described, a correct solution to the problem
is theoretically possible. In practice, however, these calculations require a very extensive
computer m e m o r y which is not usually available. In consideration of the difficulties
previously m e n t i o n e d (time effects, plastic yield, etc.), this type of analysis is as yet only
of interest in p a r a m e t e r studies and research.
120 Spread foundation
Fig. 87. Contact pressure distribution caused by point and line loads.
r=\3Kr (100)
w h e r e Kr = (,/5),
t = thickness of the raft,
Er = elastic m o d u l u s of the raft,
Es = elastic m o d u l u s of the soil.
T h e peak pressure under a point load Q can be approximated to:
3
Po =
7ir
:z (101)
For a Une load acting at distance a from the e d g e of the raft that is below the value of
r (r < bl2), the contact pressure along the edge, according to Beigler (1976), can be
obtained from the relation (Fig. 88a):
ra
Pe=P\ (103)
a
If the value pe thus obtained exceeds the plastic yield pressure of the soil pcn two outcomes
m a y occur:
P/pcr < 2a
Spread foundation 121
Fig. 88. Contact pressure distribution caused by a line load near the edge of a raft, (a) Edge pressurep e
< pcr (b) Edge pressure pe = pcr and < 2apcr (c) Edge pressure pe = pcr and > 2apcr.
2 2pcrr 2Pr
(a + rx0) JC0 = (105)
Pi Pi
4
<r * .a
4 ' **'.<>. '
 L i : V, i
>V III {
11
Px Pm P,
II i l l . .
b/2  r !
r
1
4^
Fig. 89. Contact pressure distribution under a raft acted upon by evenly distributed load q.
122 Spread foundation
0 6
Px^Pm+iPePmK^)" O )
rx 0
where = 2.SpCfJq,
pm = q(\mx)(\+m2),
Pe Pm + 5qb(n + l)[mx  ra2(l  mx)]/r <pcr,
mx = 0 . 3 6 3 / [ l  0 . 0 5 f e / r + 0 . 4 ( f e / r ) 3 ] ,
m 2 = 0.826qmx/pcr if x0> 0,
m2 = 0 if x0 < 0,
b{n + \)(qpm) r
XQ =   > 0 .
n
2n(PcrPm)
(If r > fe/2 then put r = b/2, and if x 0 < 0 then put JC 0 = 0 ) .
Example 7: Determine the contact pressure distribution beneath a raft foundation, 15 m in width, acted
upon by a line load Px = 100 kN/m, 0.5 m from the outer edge of the raft, and a central line load P2 =
2
200 kN/m. The raft is subjected to a uniformly distributed load of 10 kN/m . The raft, which is of
3
concrete with unit weight 24 kN/m , is founded at 0.5 m depth in sand. It has a thickness of 0. 5 m and
3
a modulus of elasticity Er = 20 GPa. The sand has a unit weight = 18 kN/m , an internal angle of friction
'= 30 and a modulus of elasticity Es = 25 MPa. The groundwater level is 1 m below the ground surface.
Solution'. For a friction angle of 30 the bearing capacity factor Nq = 18.4 (Eq. 112). The critical edge
pressure (which is obtained by the relation pcr = df)Nq, where dj= 0.5 m and = 0.5 m) b e c o m e s p c r =
166 kPa.
Influence of the line load near the edge of the raft:
3 1 /3
We find r = 1.30.5(20 1(> /25) = 6.0 m. Furthermore, the a value is 0.5 m. Consequently, the
contact pressure below the load becomes equal to:
px = 100/6 = 16.7 kPa
and below the edge pe = 16.7(6  0.5)/0.5 = 183.7 kPa > pcr
The width of the zone of plastic yield
1 0 0  0 . 5 ( 1 6 6 + 16.7)
in = = 0.06 m
16616.7
Influence of central line load:
We find px = 200/6 = 33.3 kPa
2
Influence of uniform load consisting of surface load 10 k N / m and selfweight of the raft 0.524 = 12
2 2
kN/m , i.e. in total 22 kN/m :
We find:
77 = 2.8166.5/22 = 8.4
Spread foundation 123
3
mx = 0.363/[l  0 . 0 5  1 5 / 6 + 0 . 4 ( 1 5 / 6 ) ] = 0.051
m 2 = 0.826220.051/166 = 0.0056 (see below)
pm = 22(1  0.051)(1 + 0.0056) = 21.0
1545(2221) 6
XQ =  < 0
244.(16621) 8.4
which yields ra2 = 0.
Thus pm = 22(1  0.051) = 20.9 kPa
pe = 20.9 + 229.40.05115/12 = 34.1 kPa
Considering the effect of the line load near the edge (which caused yield) the uniform load will extend
the width of the zone of yield to a distance from the edge of JC0 = 0.06 + (0.5  0.06)34.1/(166  16.7)
= 0.16 m
Superposition yields:
Contact pressure at raft center:
pm = 20.9 + 33.3  54 kPa
57
Contact pressure 0.5 m from e d g e p x ( 55 m) = 16.7 + 20.9 + (34.1  20.9)[5.5/(6  0 . 1 6 ) ]  47 kPa
57
Contact pressure 0.3 m from e d g e p x (5 7 m) = 20.9 + (34.1  20.9)[5.7/(6  0 . 1 6 ) ] + (0.24/0.44)(166
16.7) + 1 6 . 7  1 3 1 kPa
Contact pressure 0.16 m from edge p^o.iom) = Per=166 kPa
The contact pressure distribution across the raft is shown below.
0.06
0.16 M
JFTOi
Fig.90. Observed contact stress distribution in two crosssections of a concrete raft foundation, 400 mm
in thickness. Column spacing lengthwise of the buildings 7.2 m. In shelter section, the column load 490
kN (to the left) is replaced by a wall load of 52 kN/m. The internal wall load of the shelter = 42 kN/m.
Building completed 2/7 74 and in use 17/7 75.
Spread foundation 125
3. BEARING CAPACITY
(i) Stress condition on failure surface. Let us a s s u m e that w e have to deal with a two
dimensional case and that the force vector p, acting on a unit length of the failure surface
at a certain point, is k n o w n as well as the inclination of the failure surface at the point
in question (Fig. 92). T h e position of the point considered is determined by the arc length
s, set out from a fixed point. T h e parameters p, v, s and $ ' a r e positive w h e n they have
the directions shown in Fig. 92. Consider an element A B C D in the failure surface. Draw
the lines D C and B C parallel to A B and A D . D u e to the rotation of the sides B C and D C
the force vectors acting against D C ' and B C will change in size as shown in Fig. 92.
Now, from the equilibrium conditions for soil element A B C D an expression for the
stress vector can b e derived, the socalled Kotier 's equations. Neglecting terms of minor
significance, the equilibrium condition in the s direction yields:
p = e 2 v t a n 0 \_^^' + > 1
( ) 5 )( 1 0 8
p=/?o/ssin(vo+0O (109)
Fig. 92. Failure surface, affected by the effective stress vectorp, inclined </>'to the normal of the failure
surface (left) and soil element ABCD in the failure surface. AB C D represents a parallelogram.
126 Spread foundation
/
p = jp oe x p [ 2 ( v o v ) t a n 0 ] (110)
(ii) The bearing capacity factors. Consider a strip footing of width b resting on the ground
surface and surrounded by an evenly distributed load q0 (without internal friction). T h e
strip footing is carrying a centrical vertical load Q per length unit. T h e effective unit weight
of the soil is / .
Now, if Q is increased up to soil failure and the soil is weightless, it is obvious that the
effective stress equals the contact pressure. T h e unit weight of the soil has no influence
on the cohesion intercept c\ only on the frictional resistance. Considering only the
influence of the weight of the soil beneath the footing, the effective stresses increase from
a zero value along the edges of the footing to a m a x i m u m value below the centre of the
footing (Fig. 93). In consequence of this reasoning, w e can express the bearing capacity
of the footing as the s u m of three bearing capacity factors: related to the external load
q0, Nc related to the cohesion intercept ( / a n d N r r e l a t e d to the unit weight / o f the soil
beneath the footing. On the basis of the stress distribution at failure, shown in Fig. 9 3 , w e
have:
qf= Qj/b = 0.5bYNY+ N
qo q + c7V c (HI)
/
qNq+c Nc
assumed
b
Fig. 94. Rankine and Prandtl failure zones developed below the frictionless base of a strip footing.
(In these relations, c ' c o t 0 ' c a n be exchanged for the attraction value a).
T h e relation b e t w e e n px and p2 is found from Eq.(109 ):
Pi ~ PiexpCTCtan^O
2 / / 2
qf= 4 0 t a n ( 4 5 + 072)exp(7itan0O + c c o t 0 [ t a n ( 4 5 + 072)exp(7rtan0O  1]
This yields:
2
Nq = t a n ( 4 5 + 072)exp(7rtan0O (112)
Nc = (Nql)cot<l>' (113)
In the special case of ' = 0 (i.e. w h e n failure is governed by the undrained shear
strength cu) w e find ^ 0 = 1 and = 2+.
T h e s e solutions for Nq and Nc, originally presented b y Prandtl and Reissner (Fig. 95),
are most c o m m o n l y applied in the analysis of the bearing capacity of strip footings.
While there is a general acceptance regarding Nq and Nc, there is quite a disagreement
128 Spread foundation
about the evaluation of Ny. According to the German code DIN 4017, Ny is expressed
by the relation (Fig. 95):
NY=2{Nq\)\smQ' (114)
# y= 0 . 0 8 e x p ( 0 . 1 8 f ) (115)
yVr=(^l)tan(1.40O (116)
T h e bearing capacity factors given above are only relevant for strip footings placed
either on the ground surface or at a depth w h e r e the material above the foundation level
has neither friction nor cohesion. For individual pad footings, for footings buried in the
soil and for certain special loading conditions, the bearing capacity factors will have to
10001 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
500
0 10 20 30 40 SO
Effective angle of friction '
Fig. 95. The bearing capacity factors Nc and vs. angle of internal friction.
Spread foundation 129
be corrected. This is done by multiplying the bearing capacity factors with coefficients
w h o s e m a g n i t u d e depend on geometry of the footings, depth of foundation, loading
conditions, and so forth.
(iii) Shape and depth coefficients. In practice, w e mostly h a v e to deal with the problem
of determining the bearing capacity of individual pad footings placed at a certain depth
below the ground surface or the b a s e m e n t floor. Failure will then take place in the
direction towards the lowest adjoining ground surface or floor. Consequently, the depth
coefficients dq, dc and dy should b e based on the foundation depth that is critical with
regard to failure. Both the depth coefficients and the shape coefficients sq, sc and sy
r e c o m m e n d e d in the literature are determined on an empirical basis.
T h e shape and depth coefficients r e c o m m e n d e d in the G e r m a n code D I N 4017 are:
b
s = l03y
Y (118)
1
s _ W (119)
dq = dc = dY=l (120)
b
scQ = l+02 (121)
T h e variation of Nc0 with regard to shape and depth of the footing can b e taken from
Fig. 96.
Results of largescale plate model tests on sand (Du Thinh, 1984) indicate a better
agreement with the shape and depth factors r e c o m m e n d e d by M e y e r h o f (1961; 1963)
than with those r e c o m m e n d e d in D I N 4017. According to M e y e r h o f w e have:
b 2
10
1
b/I=\
9 1
1
/3// = 0.5
8
a? /?// = 0
tl
0 1 2 3 4
Depth to width ratio dflb
Fig. 96. Bearing capacity Nc0 as a function of shape and depth of foundation.
4 = 1 + 0 . 2 ^ tan(45 + 0 7 2 ) (125)
M e y e r h o f (1961) points out that the angle of internal friction to b e used in his
correction coefficients should be determined by direct shear tests (plain strain t e s t s ) ' I n
case the angle of friction is determined by triaxial tests, M e y e r h o f suggests that the value
thus obtained should b e replaced by:
^(UO.lyWiri. (126)
( M e y e r h o f ' s correction of the triaxial value is based on results of true triaxial testing
under plain strain condition. T h u s , the angle of friction d e t e r m i n e d under plain strain
condition has been shown to be around 1 0 % higher than the angle of friction determined
in the conventional active triaxial test).
M e y e r h o f ' s correction coefficients given in Eqs. (122) through (126) cannot be ap
plied for values of '< 10.
T h e influence of shape and depth of foundation on the bearing capacity of a cohesive
soil in undrained condition can be obtained from the d i a g r a m s h o w n in Fig. 96.
In case the groundwater level is situated below the foundation level, / i s replaced by
/ a b o v e the groundwater level and / b e l o w the groundwater level, from the foundation
level d o w n to a depth below the foundation level equal to the width of the footing.
Spread foundation 131
Example 8: Calculate the bearing capacity according to DIN 4017 on one hand and according to Meyer
hof on the other for a centrically loaded square footing with width 2.5 m founded at a depth of 1 m below
the ground surface. The soil consists of sand with an internal friction angle ''= 35. The groundwater
3
level is 1 m below the foundation level. The density of the sand is 1.8 t/m above the groundwater level
3
and 1.1 t/m below the groundwater level. The influence of capillary forces and surface tension on
effective stresses can be ignored.
1.0 m
GW 2.5 m 1.0m
Solution: The bearing capacity factors according to DIN are Nq = 33 and Ny = 45 and according to
Meyerhof Nq = 33 and Ny= 37. According to DIN we have sq = 1.574 and sy= 0.7 and dq = dy= 1 while
2
according to Meyerhof sq=sy 1.369 and dqdy\ .077. Furthermore, q0 = 18 k N / m and / a v = ( 1 .() 18
3
+1.511)72.5 = 13.8 kN/m 
Thus, according to DIN:
2 2
Vf= ft2
q = (0.52.513.8450.7 + 18331.574)2.5 = (543 + 935)2.5 = 9240 kN
(iv) Eccentric loading. In reality, the load acting on the footing is often eccentric. T h e
bearing capacity is then calculated on the assumption of a fictive, centrically loaded
footing with r e d u c e d dimensions. If the eccentricity of the load is eb in the direction of
the width of the footing and el in the length direction (Fig. 97), then the fictive footing
is assumed to h a v e the width b  2eb and the length /  2el. A footing of arbitrary shape
is replaced by a fictive rectangular footing with the same b o t t o m area and the same
principal axes and length/width relations as the reduced shape of the real footing. T h e
analysis of the reduced, fictive footing is carried out in the s a m e w a y as shown above.
(v) Inclined load resultant. W h e n the load resultant is inclined, the z o n e of failure will
b e shallower than w h e n the load resultant is vertical. In consequence, this loading case
b e c o m e s m o r e critical the higher the ratio of the horizontal c o m p o n e n t H to the vertical
c o m p o n e n t V(Fig. 98). In a case w h e r e the horizontal c o m p o n e n t is achngperpendicular
to the length direction of the footing, the correction coefficients p r o p o s e d by Brinch
Hansen (1967) can be applied:
l2e,
Fig. 97. Fictive footings to replace real footings under eccentric loading conditions.
132 Spread foundation
OJH 3
= ( 1 ) 1 2 7
^ " v + Wc'cot^ < >
^  T ^ i ( 1 2 8 )
i = 1 1 2 9
r ( TT77^ ( )
' V + blc cot
i i = c = ( l  f i / 9 0  ) 2 (130)
=(\& (131)
w h e r e = arctan(///V)
In the case of '= 0, Brinch H a n s e n (1967) p r o p o s e s the correction coefficient:
W'^ <132)
Example 9: Calculate according to DIN 4017 and Meyerhof the bearing capacity of the square footing
in Ex. 8 if the load resultant goes through the centre of the base of the footing and has an inclination of
3(vertical): 1 (horizontal).
Spread foundation 133
 1m 0
..xf&\
52m
GW U J I 1.0 m
3 3
Solution: According to DIN we have = ( 1  1 / 3 ) = 0.296 and iq = ( 1  0 . 7 / 3 ) = 0.451, while according
2 2
to Meyerhof we have i y = [1  arctan(l/3)/35] = 0.224 and iq = [1  arctan(l/3)/90] = 0.632.
The bearing capacity according to DIN is:
2 2
Rf= qfb //3 = (0.296543 + 0.451935)2.5 /T 13 = 3834 kN
and, according to Meyerhof:
2 2
Rf= qfb JW/3 =(0.224941 + 0.632876)2.5 /TO 13 = 5036 kN
Example 10: A square footing under a vertical column load of 200 kN is subjected to a horizontal load
/ / k N and a rotational moment M = 2 / / k N m . The footing has a width of 2.5 m and is placed at 1 m depth.
The groundwater level is 0.5 m below the foundation level. Determine according to DIN 4017 the value
of//, leading to foundation failure at pj 500 kPa, for a soil with an effective friction angle 0 ' = 32 and
3 3
a density above the groundwater level of = 1 . 8 t/m and below the groundwater level of p ' = 1.1 t/m .
= 2 0 0 kN
IH * iti 3?
1.0m
GW 0.5 m
2.5 m
Solution: The eccentricity of the load is eb = 2///200 = 0 . 0 1 / / which gives a reduced footing width of
b' = 2.5  0 . 0 2 / / m. The correction factors become:
2.50.02//
^ = 1+ sin*/)'
2.5
2.50.02//
7= 1  0 . 3
2.5
0.7//
200
7
200
The bearing capacity factors for ' 32 become Nq  23.2 and = 27.7 and the average unit weight
= = 3
7av Pav 12.2 k N / m . The relation becomes:
500 = 0.5(2.5  0.02//) 1 2 . 2  2 7 . 7  5 ^ + 1 8  2 3 . 2  ^
which yields / / = 37.5 kN.
(133)
l q l y
~ ~ " V + Wc'cot0 '
134 Spread foundation
(vi) Footings next to slope. For a footing that is placed near a slope with inclination
to the horizontal, Brinch Hansen (1967) suggested that the bearing capacity factors in the
case of a cohesionless soil be corrected by the coefficients:
2
(1  s i n < / ) ' ) c o s ^
= e x p K
Si Zr = ,o *>s  0  2 + 20) tan 0 '] (134)
1  sin sin(2u + ) 2
w h e r e u represents the angle of inclination of the failure surface to the downslope (Fig.
99) which by conditions of equilibrium (cf. p. 2 7 3  2 7 4 ) is obtained from the relation:
g ? = g y= ( l  0 . 7 t a n j 3 ) 3 ;i36)
T h e approximate expression generally yields results on the safe side but when the
angle of inclination of the slope tends to the angle of internal friction the difference in
results can be up to 4 0 % on the unsafe side.
In the case of an unloaded slope in cohesive soil with 0, the correction coefficient
can b e written ( in radians):
2
ScO =
1
 (137)
2+
Example 11: Determine according to Brinch Hansen how much the bearing capacity of the square
footing in Ex. 8 will be reduced if the footing is placed near aslope with inclination 1 (vertical):4(horizontal).
5
Spread foundation
(vii) Inclined base of the footing. In the case of weightless soil, the stresses along the
failure surface change in accordance with the exponential function of 2 t a n $ ' times the
angular change v. Consequently, the correction factor bq is given by:
bq = e x p (  2 v t a n 0 O (138)
The weight of the soil can be considered by the correction factor (Brinch Hansen, 1967):
By comparison with the earth pressure against a vertical, smooth retaining wall, Brinch
Hansen proposed that the correction factor in the case of inclined loading be approximated
to (notations given in Fig. 100):
U =[1(1 ) (140)
300 + blc'cot0'
2v
bc0 = 1 (141)
2+
,
/= 0 + / (142)
/>, = 6 MPA
2 MPA
1 MPA
0.5 MPA
pt = 6 MPA
2 MPA
0 . 4 MPA
0 1 2 3
'Pi = 3 MPA
1 MPA
0 . 5 MPA
pt = 3 MPA
1 MPA
0 . 5 MPA
Fig. 101. & values recommended for silt, sand and gravel
Spread foundation
Un
Pie = ('Pn'Pi2'PB'PiJ (143)
In this case the real depth of foundation d^is also replaced by an equivalent depth of
f o u n d a t i o n ^ determined by the relation:
where ; ; = dj.
T h e pressuremeter method can also b e used to determine the socalled creep load, i.e.
the load that leads to excessive creep deformations. This is done by using the creep
pressure pcr in the bearing capacity formula instead of the limit pressure/?/ (for the definition
of the creep and limit pressures, see p . 81).
For eccentric loading, a fictive footing with reduced length and width according to the
principles shown in Fig. 97 is used, i.e. with length /  2e{ and width b  2eh w h e r e e{ and
eb are the load eccentricities in the length and width directions, respectively.
For inclined loading, the reduction factor il applied to the bearing capacity is:
w h e r e 0 = arctan(///V),

Xd= \d/bfoi'0<df/b<\,
Xd = 0fovd/b>\,
Xm  1  m for 0 < m < 1,
Xm = 0 for m > 1,
m = ( at depth df)/(*pl at depth dj+ b).
If / b e c o m e s negative the footing must b e e m b e d d e d deeper.
For footings near a slope, the reduction factor gs is obtained from Eq. (145) with re
placement of 0 by the angle ', defined according to Fig. 102.
For concentric inclined loading near a slope w h e r e the inclined load is directed towards
the slope, the reduction factor is is calculated by using Eq. (145) after replacing by + '.
If the inclined load is directed away from the slope, failure m a y take place either towards
the slope (replace 0 b y 0 + ') or away from the slope (keep 0). T h e t w o cases will have
to be considered separately.
For eccentric inclined loading, the reduction factor depends on whether the load is
inclined in the direction away from the centre of the footing or towards the centre of the
footing. In the former case, the footing is assumed to h a v e the width b + 2eb while, in the
latter, the footing is assumed to h a v e the width b  2eb.
T h e pressuremeter m e t h o d is especially suitable for footings on sand, gravel and till,
where undisturbed sampling for laboratory testing is m o r e or less impossible. It is also
a useful tool for the determination of the bearing capacity of foundations on clays and
silts.
Example 12: Determine the bearing capacity of a 2 m wide strip footing acted upon by an inclined load
with V/H = 5 and founded at 1 m depth, 0.5 m from a slope 1:3 (1 vertical to 3 horizontal). The load is
inclined in the direction towards the slope. The pressure limit has been determined to 1.0 MPa at 1
%
m depth and to 1.4 MPa at 3 m depth. The equivalent net limit pressure is ple = 1.2 MPa.
Solution: The bearing capacity of the footing under a vertical centric load is obtained from:
Pj~~ 1.4*1.2 1.68 MPa
We have:
= 1  1 / 2 = 0.5
= 1  1.0/1.4 = 0.286
= 0 . 5 0 . 2 8 6 = 0.143
The angle = arctan(0.2) = 11.3 and the angle '= arctan[2/(l+33)] = 11.3 whence + '= 22.6.
This yields:
2
is = (1  22.6/90) (l  0.143) + (1  22.6/20)*0.143 = 0.46
Thus the reduced bearing capacity is Vj= 0.46*1.68*2 = 1.5 MN/m
Example 13: Calculate the bearing capacity of a square footing with 2.5 m by 2.5 m base area, placed
at 1.4 m depth 2.5 m away from a slope with inclination 1 (vertical):3(horizontal) in a soil with pt = 1.5
MPa. A horizontal load, equal to one third of the vertical load, is applied 0.9 m above the base of the
footing in the direction towards the slope.
Spread foundation 139
Solution: The inclination of the resultant R is = arctan(l/3) = 18.4 and the eccentricity eb = 0.9/3 =
0.3 m. The reduced width of the footing is 2.5  20.3 = 1.9 m. This yields '= arctanfl .9/(2.5+3.3 1.5)]
= 14.3 from which + '= 32.7. Further we have m=\J.e. Xm = 0 and, consequently, = 0. The reduc
tion factor becomes:
2
i 5 = ( l  3 2 . 7 / 9 0 ) = 0.40
The bearing capacity factor for d/b = 1.4/1.9 = 0.74 and bll =1.9/2.5 = 0.76 is k = 1.9. The reduced
2
base area is 1.92.5 = 4.75 m .
The reduced bearing capacity of the footing is thus 0.41.91.54.75 = 5.3 M N
4. SETTLEMENTS
Settlement calculations are generally based on the presumption that plastic yield in the
soil is not taking place or has a negligible effect on the settlement. T h e reliability of
conventional settlement analyses decreases successively the nearer the load is to failure.
Reliable settlement calculations can, of course, also b e carried out in such cases, for
instance b y the u s e of data technique, but these mostly require very a d v a n c e d computer
capacities and are, therefore, mainly utilised in connection with research or for parameter
studies. Before conventional settlement calculations are carried out it is certainly
necessary to m a k e sure that the factor of safety against failure is satisfactory.
The course of settlement is very m u c h dependent on the hy drauli c conductivity and the
creep properties of the soil. Settlement will not terminate until the soil skeleton has
140 Spread foundation
readjusted itself and b e c o m e strong enough to carry the effective stress increase induced
in the soil by the load of the footing. In water saturated soils with low permeability, such
as clays, the load applied is originally, wholly or partially, e a r n e d by excess pore water
pressure. T h e load is then gradually transferred to the soil skeleton with a corresponding,
simultaneous excess pore water pressure dissipation. For footings on clay, the pore
pressure m a y certainly dissipate rather quickly due to threedimensional or two
dimensional consolidation. However, spread loading of the ground in the vicinity of the
foundation, for e x a m p l e by placement of fill, m a y cause a very drawnout settlement
process. Even after complete dissipation of excess pore pressure dissipation, longterm
settlement can be expected due to creep p h e n o m e n a .
In coarsegrained material pore pressure dissipation takes place simultaneously with
the application of the load. In coarsegrained soil, settlement d u e to creep often
amounts to 3 0  4 0 % of the 'initial' settlement.
T h e settlement of footings on rock are governed by open fissures and other weaknesses
which lead to inelastic behaviour. W h e n the fissures have b e c o m e closed by the ground
pressure the rock behaves more or less as an elastic m e d i u m (Fig. 103). T h e bearing
capacity of footings on rock can be estimated from pressuremeter tests or from the
strength characteristics presented in Table 15.
T h e r e are two main causes of settlement that have to b e considered: ( 1 ) settlement due
to isotropic stress changes (mainly leading to a change in v o l u m e and, consequently, to
pore water being squeezed out of the soil) and (2) settlement due to deviatoric stress
changes (mainly leading to a change in shape). T h e volume change is governed by the
bulk m o d u l u s and the change in shape by the shear m o d u l u s G of the soil. As regards
settlement of footings, settlements due to deviatoric stress changes dominate over
settlements due to isotropic stress changes.
Fig. 103. Results of plate loading test on fissured gneiss rock of bad quality (After Pusch et <//., 1974)
Spread foundation 141
if) Analysis based on theory of elasticity. As the bending rigidity of a footing is very high
in comparison with the rigidity of the soil, the settlement of the footing can b e considered
equal at all points. According to the theory of elasticity, there are certain socalled
characteristic points at which the surface settlement of an elastic halfspace is independent
of the bending rigidity of the footing. In order to find the settlement of a rigid footing, w e
then h a v e to calculate the settlement at the characteristic point. According to Steinbrenner
(1936) this can b e done by superposition of the settlements obtained b e l o w corner I of
the four part rectangles E A F I y F B G I , G C H I and H D E I , corner I being situated at the
characteristic point of load area A B C D (Fig. 104).
Now, the settlement of a corner sc of a rectangular or square area with evenly di stributed
load q, acting on the surface of an elastic m e d i u m with limited thickness d, can be calculated
by the relation (Steinbrenner, 1936):
2 2
sjb = q[(\  v )fx + (1  v2v )f2]/E (146)
where
1 d lib
f2 arctan [ . =
2nb (dlb)yj Q+QX
2 2
Q = l + (  ) a n d Q = l + A 
b b
0.42D
B F
Fig. 104. The position of the characteristic point. The settlement at the characteristic point I is obtained
by superposition of the corner settlement of the rectangles GCHI, HDEI, EAFI and FBGI.
For calculation of the initial settlement of a footing on water saturated clay, which is due
only to shear deformations, w e have to a s s u m e = 0.5.
T h e settlements obtained by superposition of the sc values according to Eq. (146 ) can
be expressed by the relation:
s = reqb/E (147)
0.1
 \ 
0.2
0.5
1
f
<  
>
I
2
PC
\ \ \ \
\\ \ N
10
 \\y 
20
 , V \
0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
s/b = ql (r r _ )/E
i e9i EJ L I
(148)
w h e r e Fei and Fej_x represent the settlement coefficients according to Figs. 105 a  c for
the upper (depth d{_{) and lower (depth d ) t boundaries of the respective layers.
Example 14: Determine the settlement at midpoint of the long side of a rectangular area with length 10
2
m and width 2.5 m acted upon by a uniformly distributed, flexible load q  20 k N / m . The soil consists
of sand underlain by bedrock at 4 m depth. The sand is assumed to behave as an elastic medium with
Es = 20 MPa and = 0.3.
Solution: The area is cut into two equal halves, each one with length 5m and width 2.5 m. For these we
have C/ = 5 and Cd = 3.56. Thus:
( 1 + ) 2 (2 + : , ) l i
/ , = l { 2 . 1 n t ^ ^ ^ ] + ln[ /  ^ : ] } =( . 2 2 9
2(1 h V5 + 3 . 5 6  1 ) 2 + V5 + 3 . 5 6  1
0.1

0.2
0.5


2
\\\
\ \\\YV
10
W \
20' 1 \ \ 1
0.5 1 1.5
Fig. 105b. Settlement coefficient Fe for = 0.5 (relevant for incompressible soil)
144 Spread foundation
u.i
2
/ 2 = 1.6 arctan[ ] = 0.109
2
1.6 V5 + 3 . 5 6  1
The settlement becomes equal to:
2 2 3
j = 22.520[(l  0 . 3 ) 0 . 2 2 9 + (1  0.3  20.3 )0.109]/20000 = 1.3l() m
Example 15: Determine the settlement of a square footing, 2.5 m by 2.5 m, founded at 1 m depth in sand
3
and subjected to a column load of 700 kN. The sand is assumed to have a unit weight of 18 kN/m , a
modulus of elasticity of 20 MPa to a depth of 5 m and below that 30 MPa.
Solution: The settlement analysis is carried out in two steps. For the layer with Es = 20MPa we have
deji  0 and dei = 4 m from which we find Te {_x = 0 and Te t = 0.52. For the underlying sand we have
fe%i_x = 0 . 5 2 and = 0.77.
The settlement, solved by Eq. (148), becomes equal to:
0 7 7 5 2
, ^  1 1 8 ) 2 . 5 (  = = , +  ) = 0.008
2 3 3
2.5 20 10 30 10
* D

Fig. 106. Assumed stress distribution around a rigid halfsphere embedded in soil.
sd = H (149)
12G
qD
s , =  (150)
where = b u l k m o d u l u s of the soil.
Introducing a rheological coefficient  EIK and assuming that Poisson's ratio v = 1/3,
w e find the total settlement:
146 Spread foundation
TABLE 21
The value of = El to be applied in different soil and rock conditions.
TABLE 22
Shape coefficients A.
lib 1 2 3 5 20
circle square
1 1 D
s = qD(
H
+ ) = ( 2 + ) (151) J K
12G 9K 9E
y bt
^=^(1.20.2f)[^(^)^ +  ^  l
prd b t 0 pri
(152)
d/b<l.
If b < 0.6 m (which is rarely the case in practice), then b0 in Eq. (152) should be put
equal to b.
T h e rheological coefficient to be applied in different soil conditions is given in Table
21 and the shape coefficient in Table 22.
T h e practical u s e of Eq. (152) for settlement analysis described in the following is in
agreement with the routine method presented by Baguelin et al. (1978).
For the determination of the pressuremeter moduli to b e applied in the deviatoric and
the isotropic terms, the subsoil is divided into five layers as s h o w n in Fig. 107 (Baguelin
etaL, 1978).
For each one of these layers, the h a r m o n i c m e a n of the m e a s u r e d pressuremeter moduli
is determined. T h u s , if the pressuremeter values measured in a layer are Eh E2, E3,En,
the h a r m o n i c m e a n EnrY is obtained from the relation:
Now, the harmonic mean of the pressuremeter moduli in layer 1 Eprl is taken as the
(I) 1.5/7
_0.5fc
(ID 1.5/7
(3) 1.5/7
(4) 1.5/?
(5) 4/7
Fig. 107. Division of subsoil into layers for determination of pressuremeter moduli to be applied in
deviatoric and isotropic terms of Eq. (152).
148 Spread foundation
pressuremeter modulus to be used in the isotropic term Epri. The pressuremeter modulus
to b e used in the deviatoric term Eprd is obtained from the relation:
L =V ! _ +  L + _ ! ! _ , (  5 4 )
1 1
As = cczZqz() (155)
Example 16: A square footing, 2.7 m in width and founded on sand 1 m below floor level, shall be
designed for a column lod of 3 MN. Pressuremeter investigations have given the results shown below.
Determine the ultimate load and the settlement for the design load.
Solution: The ultimate load is governed by the equivalent pressure limit and the bearing capacity factor
k. In our case there is no pressuremeter value above the foundation level. The equivalent value of pj is
thus a function only of the values obtained to a depth of 1.5/?, including four pressuremeter values. We
1 /4
find *ple = (2.30.80.80.6) = 0.97 MPa. The equivalent depth in this case becomes equal to the
foundation depth, 1 m. We find the ratio djb = 1/2.7 = 0.37. From Fig. 101 the bearing capacity factor
k can be estimated at 1.2.
2 3
The ultimate load Qf = ( 18 1 + 1.2970)2.7 = 8.6 10 kN
For the determination of the settlement of the footing we have to calculate the harmonic means of the
pressuremeter moduli in the different layers 1 4. These become E { = HM( 16.5/5.2) = 7.9 MPa; E 2 = 3.8
MPa; E 3 = HM(4.3/7.3/13.8) = 6.8 MPa and E 4 = HM( 16.2/12.8) = 14.3 MPa. The value of E 5 is assumed
equal to E 4 . We have also to consider the loose layer at depths 7 and 8 m with z = HM(4.0/2.1) =
2.8 MPa.
The moduli to be introduced in the deviatoric and isotropic settlement terms are equal to:
1
Entd = f( + + + = 5.5 MPa
^ 4 7.9 0 . 8 5  3 . 8 6.8 14.3
E p n = E { = 7.9 MPa
For determination of the additional settlement due to the loose layer, E p r m is chosen as the mean value
of 14.3 and 13.8 MPa, i.e. E p n n = 14.0 MPa.
The shape coefficients for a square foundation are Xd = 1.12 and Xt  1.1. In our case, the ratio EptJp/ is
in the range of 4 to 10. The rheological coefficients can thus be estimated at 1/3. The factor ( 1.2  0 2d jib)
= 1.126
The settlement is obtained from the relation:
H ^ ^ 2 3  1.5 _L_J_ 0 0 30 m
2 2
92.7 5.5 0.6 37.9 3(2.7 + 7 . 5 ) 2.8 14.0
f
s=q (156)
(N^f^il + OAdf/b)
150 Spread foundation
Fig. 108. Settlement parameter/for various length to width ratios lib of the footing.
E= 19.6 + 0 . 7 9 ^ 3 0 M P a (157)
= 4 1 . 6 + 1.09 N 3 0 M P a (158)
= 5 N 3 0M P a (159)
Example 18: Determine the settlement of a rectangular footing with a bottom area of 2 m by 3 m
subjected to a column load of 3 MN if the footing is founded at 1.5 m depth in sand with an average
3
standard penetration resistance of 7V 30 = 35.The density of the sand is 1.8 t/m . The groundwater level
is below the foundation depth.
Solution: The settlement will be evaluated on the basis of the empirical relations given above.
1
Spread foundation
SchultzeSherif: We have dj/b = 0.75 and lib = 1.5. This y i e l d s / 0.57 m/MPa. The net foundation
pressure is q = 0.5  1.50.018 = 0.47 MPa. The settlement is obtained as:
0: 57
' = 0.47 8 7 = 0.009 m
35 (1 +0.40.75)
D,Appolonia et al. : Assuming that the soil is normally consolidated we have = 19.6 + 0.7935 =
47.3 MPa. The Te value (Fig. 105c), taking into account a soil layer with a thickness of 8 m (= 4b) is
0.77. The settlement is obtained as:
s = 0.4720.77/47.3 = 0.015 m
Assuming the soil to be overconsolidated we Find = 41.6 + 1.0935 = 79.7 MPa which yields:
s = 0.472.0.77/79.7 = 0.009 m
Parry: The modulus of elasticity = 535 = 175 MPa. The settlement becomes:
s = 0.4720.77/175 = 0.004 m
s = ClC2qZ^Az (160)
Mz
(161)
where ' = vertical stress increase at depth = 0.5b for a square footing and =b
for a strip footing
152 Spread foundation
0.5b
b
y
y
y
y
y
2b y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y'
4b
Fig. 109. Influence function Iz for square and strip footings. Function Iz for a strip footing can be used when
/ > 20b. When b <l< 20b the influence value can be obtained by interpolation between Iz for square
and strip footings.
3
Example 19: A static cone penetration test in silty sand with a unit weight of 19 k N / m has given the
result shown below. The groundwater level is at 4 m depth. Determine by Schmertmann's method the
10 years settlement of a strip footing, 0.8 m in width, subjected to a line load = 130 kN/m. The footing
is founded at a depth of 1.0 m.
1.0 m
3.2 m
Solution: The average cone resistance qc varies from 1.2 MPa at the foundation level to 1.5 MPa at a
depth of 3.2 m (4b) below the foundation level. Thus, the settlement modulus Mean be assumed to vary
from 3.50.12 = 4.20 MPa to 3.50.15 = 5.25 MPa. At 0.8 m below the foundation level we have M =
4.20 + (0.8/3.2)(5.25  4 . 2 0 ) = 4.46 MPa. Furthermore, we have '  ( 1.0 + 0.8) 19 = 34 kPa at a depth
Spread foundation 153
of 0.8 m ) below the foundtaion level and q = 130/0.8  1.0 19 = 143.5 kPa. These values of & z and
1 /2
q yield7 Z m ax = 0.5 + 0 . 1 ( 1 4 3 . 5 / 3 4 ) = 0.705.
The parameter CX = \  0.5(162.5/143.5) = 0.434 and the parameter C 2 = 1 + log(1010) = 3.0.
Dividing the subsoil into 0.4 m thick layers, we find for the respective layers  4.21, 4.40, 4.53,
4 . 6 6 , 4 . 7 9 , 4 . 9 2 , 5.05 and 5.18 MPa and the corresponding Iz values 0 . 3 2 6 , 0 . 5 7 9 , 0 . 6 4 6 , 0 . 5 2 9 , 0 . 4 1 1 ,
0.294, 0.176 and 0.059. The settlement of the footing becomes:
s = 0.4343.00.14350.4[(0.326/4.27 + 0.579/4.40 + 0.646/4.53 + 0.529/4.66 + 0.411/4.79 +
0.294/4.92 + 0.176/5.05 + 0.059/5.18) = 0.05 m.
The settlement can also be calculated in an approximate way as:
s = 0.4343.00.1435[(0.2/4.2 + 0.705/4.46)0.8/2 + (0.705/4.46)(3.2  0.8)/2] = 0.05 m
T h e settlement analysis in the case of raft foundations is an intricate matter and is very
much dependent on the location of columns and loadcarrying walls and the stiffness of
the raft and superstructure. Therefore, settlement calculations are generally carried out
by the aid of computers (see Bowles, 1988).
Mostly, calculations can be performed in a fairly simple manner. T h u s , for raft
foundations on soft, compressible soil (such as normally consolidated, or lightly
overconsolidated clay) w h e r e settlement is mainly a matter of primary and secondary
consolidation, the overall average settlement can b e calculated in the s a m e analytical way
as for individual footings, for e x a m p l e by using M values determined by the oedometer
test and the 2:1 m e t h o d for calculation of the stress increase in the subsoil. T h e settlement
distribution underneath the building will then have to be estimated with due consideration
to the gradual buildup of the rigidity of the raft and superstructure during construction
of the building.
Relative compression, %
0 5 10 15
is 1 1 0
154 Spread foundation
2
Solution: The load release due to excavation is equal to 2 16 = 32 kN/m . Thus, the load increase under
2
the weight of the building is 50  32 = 18 kN/m . The stress increase in the soil is below 20kPa and,
therefore, the ML value governs the compression throughout the clay layer. The determination of the
primary compression is exemplified for 5, 10 and 15 m depths.
3 2
5 m depth: = 18/[(1+5/15)(1+5/20)0.1710 ] = 6.410'
3
10 m depth: = 18/[(1+10/15)(1+10/20)0.1710 ] = 4.2 K H
3 2
15 m depth: = 18/[(1+15/15)(1+15/20)0.1710 ] = 3.010"
The total primary settlement to be expected, which is the area of the primary compression graph, is
sp = 0.85 m. (This settlement corresponds to a CR value of 0.35, see p. 77).
The remaining primary settlement (cf. p. 31)after 10 years is determined by Helenelund's method (p.
2
323). Choosing a layer thickness Az = 3m we have At=(Az) /(4cv) = 2.25/0.5=4.5 years. The construction
is carried out as shown on the previous page.
After a loading time of 2At (9 years) we have a remaining primary settlement sr = 3(0.026 + 0.056
+ 0.052 +0.038 +0.014) = 0.56 m and after a loading time of 3At (13.5 years) sr = 3(0.021 + 0.048 + 0.049
+0.035 +0.012) = 0.50 m. The remaining primary settlement after 10 years can be estimated by
interpolation which yields sr = 0.56  (0.56  0.50)/4.5 = 0.55 m.
Thus, the settlement after 10 years can be estimated at 0.85  0.55 = 0.30 m.
Deep foundations 155
DEEP FOUNDATIONS
1. INTRODUCTION
2. PILES
(i) Timber piles. Timber piles represent the earliest type of piles and w e r e m o r e or less
the only ones used until the end of the nineteenth century. Old buildings on piles,
therefore, p r e s u m a b l y rest on timber piles, often via a mattress of horizontal planks, laid
out in order to achieve an evenedout stress distribution underneath the footings.
N o w a d a y s , timber piles are mainly used in places with deep cohesive soil layers and a
high groundwater level.
T h e m o s t obvious p r o b l e m with timber piles is the deterioration caused by fungi
attacks above and in the vicinity of a fluctuating groundwater level. Rotting of the part
of timber piles that sticks out of the groundwater is very frequent and m a y cause serious
problems. T h u s , as the degree of rotting underneath the different footings is generally
subjected to large variations, rotting usually leads to large differential settlements
followed by severe cracking of the buildings. This is a serious p r o b l e m in m a n y old cities.
Piles, originally submerged, may gradually rise above groundwater level due to withdrawal
of groundwater or, as is the case in Scandinavia, due to the land h e a v e taking place after
the ice age. Typical damages caused by rotting of piles and mattresses are shown in Fig. 110.
Investigations performed by w o o d researchers indicate that bacteriological activity
m a y cause l o n g  t e r m deterioration also below the g r o u n d w a t e r level. In practice,
however, the effect of such possible attacks of bacteria can b e disregarded. A good
156 Deep foundations
(ii) Concrete piles. T h e use of concrete piles has m a n y practical advantages and,
therefore, h a v e b e c o m e the m o s t c o m m o n type of piles used in foundation engineering.
T h e m a i n reason for their popularity is that there are almost no restraints in respect of
shape or installation m e t h o d s .
T h e m e t h o d s of installation and production of piles vary with regard to subsoil
conditions and local tradition. In s o m e countries precast piles d o m i n a t e the market,
while, in other countries, piles cast in place are prevailing. T h e m e t h o d of installation has
Deep foundations 157
Fig. 111. Pile shoe of steel for protection of pile tip from being damaged during pile driving.
a great influence on the geotechnical properties to be used in the analysis of the per
formance of the pile when loaded.
The concrete to be used for the production of precast piles has to be of very high quality
in order to withstand the severe treatment of pile driving. In particular, the toughness of
the concrete is important as the number of blows of the pile hammer required to reach the
expected bearing capacity can be very large and lead to destruction of the pile. Moreover,
in order to protect the tip of the pile from being damaged during installation, the pile is
often provided with a pile shoe of steel (Fig. 111).
The width, or diameter, of precast piles is usually between 0.25 and 0.35 m and the
length limited to 1214 m in order to facilitate transport of the piles from the pile factory
to the building site as well as installation. Special splices have been constructed which
have the capacity of taking up equally large tension forces and bending moments as the
pile itself (Fig. 112). Moreover, the splice connecting two pile segments should be
constructed so as to have the same rigidity as the pile segments themselves.
Piles cast in place exist in many different forms among which the most common ones
are bored and auger piles formed by removing the soil. These are also referred to as non
displacement piles in contrast to displacement piles which represent all the precast and
cast in place piles which are driven into the ground.
A m o n g the driven castinplace piles, the Raymond and the Franki piles are probably
the most wellknown.
In some places, concrete can be subjected to considerable corrosion due to aggressive
constituents in the groundwater. Certain molluscs exist in sea water which burrow in
concrete or secrete a substance that has a solvent action even on rock.
158 Deep foundations
(iii) Steel piles. Steel piles represent an alternative to precast concrete piles in places
w h e r e the subsoil conditions entail large risks of the concrete piles being d a m a g e d during
pile driving. Rolled steel shapes, for e x a m p l e H piles, which have high bending rigidity
are c o m m o n l y utilised, but rolled bar irons of circular, square or Xshaped crosssection
Concrete pile
with fixed
steel case
+. J
are also in use. Steel piles are generally driven into firm, bearing strata often bedrock
or hard till.
Steel piles mostly require some kind of protection against corrosion.
(iv) Composite piles. Composite piles refer to piles which are formed by a suitable
combination of concrete and steel, or concrete and timber.
A conical shape of the piles is advantageous with regard to pile bearing capacity.
Therefore, and of course also for economical reasons, timber piles are still of interest in
foundation engineering. Then, if the head of the timber pile can be expected to stick out
of the groundwater surface, which would entail fungi attacks and rotting of the timber,
composite piles have to be chosen where the timber pile segment is spliced with a
concrete pile segment on top. The main obstacle to the use of these composite piles is the
difficulty of constructing a splice that is rigid enough and can resist the tension forces
obtained during pile driving (Fig. 113).
Tubularsteel piles are another type of composite piles, usually consisting of steel
casing utilised during pile installation and later filled with reinforced concrete. In other
cases, piles are made of a steel core enclosed by reinforced concrete. Socalled micro
Fig. 114. Micropiles, in this case socalled steelplastic piles, being installed in room with low ceiling
height. The steelplastic piles consists of a steel tube covered by 1.8 mm of polyethylene plastic. The
pile segments are spliced by means of galvanised steel tube sleeves which are pressed upon the pile after
that the plastic cover has been softened by heating. The diameter varies from 76 to 102 mm.
160 Deep foundations
piles consist of smalldiameter steel tubes filled with cement and provided with some
kind of corrosion protection, for example a plastic cover (Fig. 110).
A displacement pile is defined as a solid pile, or a hollow pile driven with its tip closed,
which displaces an equivalent soil volume by compaction or by lateral or vertical
displacement of the soil. Most of the displacement piles are precast concrete piles, steel
piles, or timber piles which by necessity have to be driven into the soil. However, driven
concrete piles can also be cast in place. In this case a closedended casing is driven into
the soil whereupon the pile is cast inside the casing. The casing can either be left in the
soil, which is the case with the Raymond pile, or withdrawn from the soil, as is the case
with the Franki pile. The Raymond pile is tapered which improves its bearing capacity.
The Franki pile can be installed in several ways (Fig. 115). There is, however, a common
feature. The casing is filled before installation with 'dry' concrete to a height of 1 to 2 m.
The concrete plug, thus formed in the casing, serves as a watertight pile tip during
driving. The pile is then driven into the soil by means of 4  5 m long hammer dropped
inside the casing. When the pile tip has reached its design level, the casing is fixed to the
ground surface and the concrete plug is driven out of the casing, thereby causing
compaction of the soil around the pile tip. In this way the Franki pile b e c o m e s
dynamically preloaded.
(i) Driving equipment. Displacement piles are driven into the soil, generally by means of
gravity hammers but also by the use of steam/air hammers, diesel hammers of different
kinds or vibratory drivers. The gravity hammer is simply a weight (generally t) which
is lifted a certain distance with a hoist line and then released to fall and strike a drive cap
(Fig. 116).
Fig. 115. Schematic picture of hammer and driving tube and installation methods for three different
types of Franki piles: a+b+c = standard Franki pile, a+b+d+e = vibrated Franki pile and a+b+f+g =
composite Franki pile.
Deep foundations 161
hammer

pile
J w +
Fig. 117. Stresses acting on pile element due to the impact of the pile hammer.
eccentrics in the driver which can be rotated at a steadystate frequency w h e n loaded with
an oscillating pile. Their driving efficiency depends on amplitude, frequency, centrifugal
force, vibrating weight and nonvibrating weight. European vibratory drivers usually
operate at a frequency of 1 0  3 0 H z while, for instance, the A m e r i c a n B o d i n e Resonant
Driver operates at a frequency of 5 0  1 5 0 Hz.
(ii) Influence of stress wave during pile driving. T h e stress w a v e caused by the impact of
the r a m is travelling d o w n w a r d s the pile until it reaches the pile tip w h e r e it is reflected,
travelling u p w a r d until it reaches the pile head, reflected again and travelling d o w n w a r d s ,
and so on. Stress w a v e analysis is used as a basis for determination of the bearing capacity
of driven piles (see p. 175).
T h e effect of the stress w a v e on the pile can be studied by simply assuming that
damping of the stress w a v e by the surrounding soil can b e disregarded.Considering the
forces acting u p o n a pile element (Fig. 117) under the assumption of no influence of the
surrounding soil, w e h a v e ( N e w t o n ' s 2nd law):
w
Ap = Appp 2
(162)
2 2
dw 2
jd w
2 c  ^ (163)
dt dz
dw
(, 0 = cf\ (zct) + cf'2(z + ct) (165)
at
N o w , for the initial (primary) stress w a v e (the first term in Eq. 164) w e find the
following correlation:
dw , E n dw
= E (z,t)
p = EJ^zct) = ^ ( z , t ) (166)
az c m
Hence:
dw dw
Oz = {z,t)y/Eppp = (Z IA )(z,t) (167)
at p
at
where E^A^fc is the i m p e d a n c e ; alternatively n a m e d the d y n a m i c stiffness of the pile
(cf. the static stiffness EpAp/lp).
In the case of the gravity h a m m e r , the velocity enforced on the pile w h e n it hits the pile
h e a d is:
= a/gh (168)
dt
where h = free fallheight of the h a m m e r (cf p. 178, h a m m e r efficiency),
g = acceleration of gravity.
164 Deep foundations
1 _ 1
= ^/ / = aZy/lghlAp
(169)
If E  > w e find a = 1.
If the moduli of elasticity and the crosssectional areas and the densities of the pile and
the pile h a m m e r are the same, i.e. Eh Ep\ Ah Ap\ rh rp, w e find a = 0.5. In the latter
case the stress w a v e b e c o m e s rectangular with a length equal to double the length of the
pile hammer.
T h e shape of the stress w a v e can be adjusted by choosing a suitable cushion block
placed in the drive cap under the hammer. T h e length of the w a v e is independent of the
drop height.
F r o m Eq. (169) w e find that the normal stress induced in the pile by the impact of the
h a m m e r is dependent on the drop height but independent of the weight of the hammer.
In case the pile tip is driven d o w n to rigid material (big blocks or bedrock), the reflected
stress w a v e will be a compressive stress w a v e with the same intensity as the stress wave
travelling d o w n w a r d s . T h u s , for a short m o m e n t the stresses at the pile tip will
superimpose which often leads to crushing of the pile tip (Fig. 118).
In the case of rectangular stress waves, the m a x i m u m compressive stress at the pile tip
will be:
Fig. 118.Crushing of pile tip due to overlapping of the compressive stress wave caused by pile driving.
Deep foundations 165
Fig. 119. Tensile cracks in concrete pile caused by the tensile stress wave obtained in pile driving.
(170)
Normally, however, the m a x i m u m compressive stress reached at pile refusal does not
exceed 1.51.8 times the initial stress.
If, on the other hand, the soil resistance at the pile tip is negligible, the stress w a v e will
stretch the pile tip and the reflected w a v e travelling u p w a r d s will be a tensile stress w a v e
of equal intensity as the compressive stress w a v e reaching the tip, /. e.\
(171)
In this case, tensile cracks in the pile m a y be obtained (Fig. 119). If the pile is under
water, water will be sucked into the cracks and then forced out of the cracks by the
following compressive stress w a v e , a jetting process that m a y cause erosion of concrete
around the opening of the cracks.
T h e stress w a v e velocity in h o m o g e n e o u s (uncracked) piles is 3 2 0 0 to 3 9 0 0 m/s,
depending upon the quality of the concrete, and in steel about 5 1 0 0 to 5 2 0 0 m/s.
The driving of the piles b e c o m e s most efficient w h e n the stress w a v e has a rectangular
shape. Therefore, the design of the gravity h a m m e r and the drive cap has been carried out
with the attempt of achieving a stress w a v e that b e c o m e s as closely rectangular as
166 Deep foundations
possible. For e x a m p l e , a cup spring drive cap (Fig. 120) has been developed w h i c h limits
the peak value of the stress w a v e and, consequently, m a k e s it independent of the height
of fall of the hammer. An increase of the height of fall only increases the length (the
duration) of the stress w a v e . By using the cup spring drive cap, crushing of piles driven
by m e a n s of steam/air h a m m e r s can also be avoided.
Fig. 121. Damage to building caused by pile driving forfoundation of adjacent building.
M o s t probably, piling also triggered the slide disaster at Surte in 1950 comprising an
area of around 25 h a (Fig. 122). In the slide, one person was killed and two badly hurt
while 31 houses were m o r e or less destroyed.
In dense, saturated granular soil, pile driving by m e a n s of a gravity h a m m e r or a steam/
air h a m m e r m a y b e very timeconsuming and troublesome and entail considerable risk
of concrete piles fatigue. However, the rate of penetration of the piles can b e increased
considerably by the use of vibratory drivers. In that case, the bearing capacity and the
settlement behaviour of the pile will b e dependent on the frequency of the driver during
installation.
Socalled false refusal, i.e. w h e n the resistance observed during pile driving will be
strongly reduced after termination of driving, represents a p r o b l e m often encountered,
particularly in finegrained cohesionless soils. This p h e n o m e n o n is m o s t probably due
to an increase in soil strength by pore water underpressure (suction) i n d u c e d during pile
driving.
T h e compaction of loose granular soil caused by pile driving m a y obstruct the
possibility of driving the piles to equal depth in a pile group. T h u s , the piles first driven
reach m u c h deeper before the required resistance is obtained than the piles driven at the
168 Deep foundations
Fig. 122. The slide at Surte north of Gothenburg on Sept. 29, 1950, is assumed to have been triggered
by pile driving in the area.
end. This entails bad e c o n o m y since the piles not driven to full depth will h a v e to b e cut.
Moreover, the load/settlement characteristics of the piles first driven m a y b e quite
different from those last driven. This p r o b l e m can be avoided by providing the piles with
Fig. 124. Coring operation in soft clay. To the left: clay core just withdrawn from the soil. To the right:
clay forced out of the tube by the aid of compressed air.
central tubes and special arrangements for the application of water jetting (Fig. 123).
W h e n the piles h a v e reached the intended depth, the pile installation can then be
finalised b y driving the pile to greater depth with a pile h a m m e r .
Pile driving in soft clays usually entails a heave and a reduction (sometimes considerable,
for e x a m p l e in highly sensitive clays) of the undrained shear strength w h i c h has to be
taken into account in stability analyses. In order to reduce the disturbance effects, clay
cores are taken w h e r e the piles are to b e driven. T h e coring operation is carried out by
m e a n s of a hollow tube with a vent at the top w h i c h is kept open w h e n the tube is driven
into the soft clay to release trapped air. T h e tube is driven to a depth of 6 to 8 m. T h e vent
is closed and c o m p r e s s e d air is injected into the tube at its b o t t o m to eliminate v a c u u m
during withdrawal. After withdrawal, the clay is forced out of the tube b y m e a n s of
compressed air (Fig. 124).
Fig. 125. Examples of installt of borec' ^iles: To the le. use of auger boring. To the right: use of
rotary boring (by courtecy of Bachy).
reinforcement, in the form of a prefabricated cage, is usually placed in the hole prior to
concreting. In the case of continuous auger piles, the reinforcement cage is placed
immediately after the auger has been r e m o v e d (Fig. 126).
In many cases the borehole for the pile can be formed in stable ground condition where
no support of the sides of the hole is required. In other cases, however, the employment
of casings or, more commonly, bentonite slurry may be required to ensure the stability
of the borehole.
Casings are generally used only as a temporary measure to provide stability during
boring and concreting. Permanent casings may be necessary in weak soils which cannot
sustain the lateral pressure of the fresh concrete.
If the borehole is stabilised by means of bentonite suspension a short collar casing is
almost always used. The use of bentonite does not seem to have any negative influence
on the quality or integrity of the pile. On the contrary, it seems safer to use bentonite for
borehole stabilisation than casing (Sliwinski & Fleming, 1984)
Bored piles with a diameter ranging from 0.3 to 0.6 m are generally referred to as small
diameter piles and those with diameters above 0.6 m as large diameter piles or sometimes
as caissons. With modern methods, bored piles can be installed with a m a x i m u m rake of
4:1 (vertical:horizontal). The diameter is in the range of 0.45 to 3.5 m. By means of a
special tool, the piles can be underreamed to a tip diameter of up to 5.4 m (Figs. 127128).
The diameter of continuous flight auger piles is in the range of 0.35 to 1.5 m.
(ii) Installation problems. In difficult soil conditions, for instance when the ground
contains a great number of boulders, blasting may have to be carried out below the tip of
the casing. The shock waves produced by blasting may induce excess pore water pres
sures and cause compaction of the soil in a similar way as during pile driving. Careless
excavation in sand and silt soils below the groundwater level involves a great risk of
bottom erosion (piping) which can badly affect the ground conditions in the vicinity ofthe
172 Deep foundations
Fig. 128. Underreamed cave under inspection. Underreaming can only be used in the case of stiff or very
stiff clays.
excavation. In this case, the borehole for the pile has to be stabilised by m e a n s of bentonite
suspension or by filling the borehole with water to a higher level than that of the sur
\fs
(negligible)
m
qt (negligible)
Fig. 130. End bearing pile (left) and friction pile.
rounding groundwater. As in the case of driven piles, the installation of bored piles may
lead to severe d a m a g e to nearby buildings (Fig. 129).
Before the excecution of holes for piles in soft clay, the shear strength of the clay has
to b e k n o w n . T h e existence of possible sand or silt layers is a reason for taking special
precautions. T h e release of overburden pressure during excavation can lead to a drastic
decrease in the shear strength below the b o t t o m of the hole and adventure stability even
though the original shear strength might h a v e seemed satisfactory.
T h e integrity of bored piles can be jeopardised by segregation of concrete, inclusion
of soil or slurry, cavities in the concrete, displacement of the reinforcement cage, etc.
Therefore, possible sources of defects m u s t be anticipated and measures taken to ensure
the integrity of the piles.
T h e load carried by the pile is transferred to the soil b y frictional resistance along the pile
shaft and/or b y pile tip resistance (Fig. 130). If the major resistance to load is derived
merely by side friction (or by adhesion in the pile/soil interface), w e speak offriction piles
(or, less commonly, floating piles). On the other hand, if the major resistance to load is
exerted by the pile tip, w e speak of point bearing piles or, alternatively, end bearing piles.
A friction/end bearing pile is a pile that carries the load by both frictional resistance and
point resistance.
T h e bearing capacity of end bearing piles is of course dependent on the characteristics
of the soil on which the pile tip is resting and on tip dimensions. In h o m o g e n e o u s soil,
the end bearing capacity increases with depth until the pile tip reaches the socalled
'critical depth' below which no further increase can be noticed. Dynamic preloading
174 Deep foundations
improves the bearing capacity of the soil. Therefore, driven piles can usually c a n y a
higher load than nondisplacement piles with the same tip area.
T h e bearing capacity of friction piles depends on the angle of internal friction in the
soil, the coefficient of friction between soil and pile and the normal pressure against the
sides of the pile. A considerable n u m b e r of pile loading tests h a v e s h o w n that the bearing
capacity of friction piles in cohesionless soils generally increases with time after pile
installation (stedt et , 1990). This is most probably due to postdensification effects,
similar to those observed in connection with soil i m p r o v e m e n t by blasting or vibratory
compaction (Mesri et , 1990).
In clay soils, the bearing capacity is governed by the longterm shear strength of the
clay. T h e roughness of the sides of the pile and pile material h a v e certainly a considerable
influence on the frictional resistance in granular soils but s e e m negligible in cohesive
soils. W h e n , in the latter case, the pile is driven, the soil around the pile will be remoulded
within a zone that extends to at least one pile diameter from the pile surface. T h e resulting
excess pore water pressure around the pile m a y reach and even locally exceed the total
overburden pressure. Reconsolidation of the r e m o u l d e d clay leads to an increase in the
undrained shear strength of the clay. T h e reconsolidated, r e m o u l d e d clay adheres to the
pile surface and rupture takes place in the clay with lower shear strength outside the pile
surface (cf. B r o m s & H a n s b o , 1981).
T h e shape of the pile is important for the bearing capacity of friction piles. Conic piles,
for instance, such as timber piles with a pile tip diameter considerably smaller than the
diameter of the pile head, are very advantageous from the point of view of frictional
resistance.
In the case of piled foundations, fullscale loading tests are often prescribed as a check
on the bearing capacity predicted according to the m e t h o d of analysis applied. Fullscale
loading test h a v e the advantage of providing information not only of the ultimate pile load
but also of the w h o l e load vs. settlement relationship.
T h e ultimate pile load by definition is the load that leads to failure. T h e r e are, however,
Deep foundations 175
Fig. 131. Determination of the ultimate load by the Polish method (Mazurkiewicz, 1972), (left), and by
Brinch Hansen's 80% criterion (Brinch Hansen, 1963).
cases w h e r e the ultimate load according to this definition is difficult to e s t e e m from the
shape of the load/settlement curve. Therefore, rules h a v e been w o r k e d out to ease the
determination of the ultimate load irrespective of the shape of this curve. Unfortunately,
however, such rules exist in great n u m b e r s and they do not give us o n e and the same
answer (This has been thoroughly discussed in Sellgren, 1981).
Also the w a y the pile loading test is carried out affects the result obtained. Certainly,
the best w a y of performing the test is to use the loading procedure described previously
in the case of plate loading tests (see p. 79), a socalled " M L T " (maintained load test), in
which the load is increased in defined increments and each load level is held at equal
length of time. This gives us not only the ultimate load but also the critical pile load, also
called the creep load, which represents the load w h i c h causes a sudden increase in the rate
of creep settlement of the pile (in this case equal to the creep that takes place in each load
step).
T h e ultimate load can preferably b e interpreted on the basis of the socalled Polish
m e t h o d or by Brinch H a n s e n ' s 8 0 % criterion (Fig. 131).
(i) Pile driving energy. In this approach it is a s s u m e d that the pile and the h a m m e r are both
totally stiff (cf. stress w a v e analysis).
Let us a s s u m e that the pile is driven by m e a n s of a gravity h a m m e r . Let us further m a k e
the following assumptions:
176 Deep foundations
Fig. 132. Assumed correlation between pile load and pile movement. The shadowed area represents
consumed energy by the impact of the hammer.
m a s s of gravity h a m m e r mh
mass of pile mp
velocities of hammer pile
at the impac vh 0
immediately after Vh v'p
coefficient of restitution pile/hammer e.
T h e correlation between the velocities of the gravity h a m m e r and the pile then
becomes:
v'u = v'pevh (172)
T h e law of m o m e n t u m yields:
whence
m e m
*  P (174)
v'h = /
mh + nip
and
v'p = v h  ^  ( \ + e ) (175)
mh 4 nip
w L
= (mhvh +m pv p ) = (176)
I 2 m h + mn
Deep foundations 111
2
or, since vh = 2gh, w h e r e h is the drop height of the h a m m e r and g is the acceleration of
gravity,
2
mh + e mp
W = gmhh ^ (177)
mh+mp
This energy is transferred into pile m o v e m e n t . A s s u m i n g that the elastic r e b o u n d of the
pile head is sel and that the remaining, plastic (irrecoverable) m o v e m e n t is spl (the set),
w e have (Fig. 132):
W= Qf(spl+sel) (178)
2
m m h h m h + e m p
+
s m m
Spl 2d h + p
w h e r e is the h a m m e r efficiency.
T h e m a g n i t u d e of the coefficient of restitution depends on whether or not a drive cap
is used and, in such a case, on the properties of the drive cap unit (see, for e x a m p l e ,
Chellis, 1951).
A s regards the h a m m e r efficiency w e can a s s u m e = 1 for freefall h a m m e r s and
7] = 0.75 for single hoist line h a m m e r s .
In the S w e d i s h pile code, a modified H i l e y ' s formula, especially useful w h e n the pile
is driven b y the aid of a mandrel, has been accepted which takes into account results of
stress w a v e m e a s u r e m e n t s :
where
A E EA 9
Pp p P ff
mh>3t,
Ep = elastic m o d u l u s of pile,
Ap = crosssectional area of pile,
Pp = density of pile,
If = length of follower,
Ef elastic m o d u l u s of follower,
Af= crosssectional area of follower.
178 Deep foundations
Example 21: Determine the ultimate pile load according to Hiley's pile formula, on the one hand, and
according to the modifed pile formula of the Swedish pile code, on the other, if the permanent set spl
= 3 mm per blow using a 3 1 single hoist line hammer and a drop height of 0.3 m. The rebound sd is estimated
at 10 mm. The pile is 12 m in length and has a crosssectional area of 0.25 m by 0.25 m and a modulus
3
of elasticity of 3 GPa. The density of the pile is 2.4 t/m . A 2 m long steel mandrel with the same cross
sectional area as the pile is utilised for the pile driving. The elastic modulus of the steel mandrel is 20
GPa. The coefficient of restitution e = 0.5.
2
Solution: The mass of the pile mh = 120.25 2.4 = 1.8 t. For a single hoist line hammer the hammer
efficiency = 0.75.
Hiley's pile formula yields:
0 . 7 5 . 9 . 8 1 . 3> 0.5 3 + 0.521.8
^ 0.003 + 0 . 0 1 0 / 2 3+1.8
According to the modified pile formula, the rebound sel is expressed as a function of and need
not be measured. Substituting sel in Eq. (180), Qf can be solved analytically from a second degree
equation. It can also be found by trial and error:
Assuming Qj= 992 kN, we find:
3
Sei =992( 4A 6 + 2 6
) = 10.74 10" m
2 . 4 0 . 2 5 3 0 . 0 . 2 5 2 0 0
whence
0 . 7 5 . 9 . 8 1 . 3 . 0.5 1 0
^ 0.003 + 0 . 0 1 0 7 4 / 2
i.e. the same value as that obtained by Hiley's formula.
Hiley's pile formula can be applied also for singleacting steam/air h a m m e r s . In the
case of doubleacting steam/air h a m m e r s or diesel h a m m e r s being used, the impact
velocity of the r a m vr is obtained from the relation:
2
vr = 27] Wlmr (181)
w h e r e W i s the impact energy, is the h a m m e r efficiency and mr is the mass of the ram.
This yields the pile formula:
Of = 
S
E
(182)
Spl + 2 el Wr + Mp
E+gmvrn
P
Qf= , 083)
rp +fsL
= ^ ( , 0 = (184)
dt
Q = IQ + Q (185)
180 Deep foundations
lQ = [Q(t) + v(t)Z]/2
= [(*+2Z/c)  v(f+2//c)Z]/2
dyn = ^  T ) (189)
or
r r (r)+Zv(Q ( /+ 2 / / c )  Z v ( ; + 2 / / c ) n
dyn=4l   ~ J U^U;
dyn = ^ [ ( 0 + Zv(i) J
t o (191)
stat = t o t  J c m ) + ()  t ]
o t (192)
sand 0.050.20
silty sand 0.150.20
sandy silt 0.200.30
silt 0.200.45
silty clay 0.400.70
clay 0.601.10
Example 22: Determine by the Case method the static bearing capacity of a driven concrete pile, 20 m
in length and 235 mm in width, for which the stress wave measurements has given the results shown
below. The measuring point is 1 m below the pile head. The pile tip is in silt. The elastic modulus of
concrete can be assumed equal to 30 GPa.
Solution: In this case, 7 c c a n be assumed equal to 0.3. The stress wave velocity is obtained by the relation:
9
c = y/Ep/pp = ^ 3 0  1 0 / 2 4 0 0 = 3536 m/s
The time from the initiation of the stress wave to the arrival of the reflected stress wave:
t = 2lp/c = 219/3536 = 10.7 ms
which is in good agreement with the stress wave interpretation that yields t = 11 ms.
By setting off the time iy c from the time of the measured force maximum ( m ax = 1610kN) we find
the magnitude of the reflected force (vZ). We obtain:
Ou* = (1610 + 550)/2 + [(1610  (  167)]/2 = 1970 kN
whence:
s t a=
t 1 9 7 0  0 . 3 ( 2  1 6 1 0  1 9 7 0 )  1600 kN
In the CAPWAP analysis (Rausche et , 1972) the pile and the h a m m e r are represented
by finite rigid e l e m e n t s (Fig. 133) j o i n e d together by springs representing the stiffness
of the pile and the h a m m e r while the soil resistance is represented by elastic springs and
rigid plastic s p elements in combination with viscous dashpots. A s s u m i n g that the total
dynamic and static soil resistance per unit length of the pile is Rd w e h a v e the stress w a v e
equation (cf. Eq. 163):
182 Deep foundations
viscous dashpot
Fig. 133. Pile/soil model used in the CAPWAP analysis. Elements 1 and 2 represent the hammer and
the pile cap, elements 311 the pile itself. The resistance of the surrounding soil is represented by springs
in parallel with viscous dashpots.
2 D2
dw 2 W
= c (193)
A
dz Pp p
Force, kN
2000
Measured
1500 L Calculated
1 1 1
' ' '
10 15 20 2 5 ^ " 30 35 40 45 50
Time, ms
Fig. 134. Result of computerised CAPWAP analysis. Good agreement has been obtained between the
measured and calculated force vs. time function by successively readjusting the spring and damping
coefficients of the soil.
ks = nGAl (195)
Dn^mzx 5/(1)
w
9 =
4G
^
P
Dp
P
I+ >
2
(196)
CH = TiDpMDyfp~G (197)
184 Deep foundations
CR =nDpAl/pG (198)
w h e r e D = d a m p i n g ratio,
pp = density of the pile,
= soil density.
T h e d a m p i n g ratio D can be obtained by the the relation:
= 7 ^  (199)
1+7/*
y by
w h e r e yh = [1 + a e x p (  ) ] .
Yr 7r
TABLE 23
Parameters and b and maximum damping ratio D m ax according to Hardin & Drnevich (1972).
Soil type a b
1/6
Clean, dry sand 0.6yV l 1_/12 1
3 3  1.5logW )
1 /6 m2
Clean, water saturated sand 0.54/V  0.9 0.65(1 N~ ) 2 8  1.5logW
^ = the number of loading cycles (in this case the blow counts for the last m of penetration)
k^lGD^lv) (200)
w = Qp/ks (201)
0.85Z)/
CR = (203)
1v
1
G = G 0 ( l + 7/>)
5
w h e r e G 0 = shear m o d u l u s for strains y~ l(h ,
with and a c c o r d i n g to Table 4, p. 27 (/Vin Table 4 represents in this case the b l o w count
for the last m e t r e of penetration).
T h e shear strain a m p l i t u d e can be taken as the ratio of the a v e r a g e particle velocity
of the pile and the shear w a v e velocity vs of the soil, i.e.:
(204)
As the shear strain a m p l i t u d e s , p r o d u c e d by pile driving, are quite large, both shear
m o d u l u s and d a m p i n g factors m u s t b e d e t e r m i n e d as functions of the i n d u c e d strain in
Example 23: Determine the input values of shear modulus, soil stiffness, soil rigidity and damping
factors to be applied in the SVIDYN analysis for a pile shaft element at 10 m depth in saturated sand
3
with density = 1.8 t/m , angle of internal friction 32 and Poisson's ratio = 0 . 4 5 . The shear wave
3
velocity in the sand is 200 m/s. The steel pile has a diameter Dp = 0.5 m and a density pp = 7.78 t/m .
The observed number of blow counts per m of penetration = 500. The average particle velocity can
be assumed equal to 1 m/s.
Solution: The shear modulus can be determined from Eq. (25). According to Table 4 we have a  
3
0.2log500 =  0.540 and = 0.16. From the shear wave and particle velocities we find y= 1/200  5 10
2 3
and G 0 = 1.8200 =72 10 kPa. The r m ax value depends on the depth in the soil. At a depth of 10 m, c\
2
can be estimated at 110 kPa. Choosing K0 = 0.5 in Eq. (26) we then find T m xa = [(0.75 1 1 0 s i n 3 2 ) 
2 1 /2 4
( 0 . 2 5  1 1 0 ) ] = 34 kPa. This yields yr = 0.034/72 = 4.7 10" and ylyr = 10.6 whence yh = (10.6)[1 
3 3
0.540exp(0.16 10.6)] = 9.6 and G  7 2  1 0 / 1 0 . 6 = 6.8 1 0 kPa. Maximum damping ratio, according
to Hardin & Drnevich, becomes D m ax = (28  1.5log500)/100 = 0.24. With regard to damping we have
yh = (10.6)11  0.708exp( 0.26310.6)] = 10.1. Thus, D = 0.2410.1/11.5 = 0.21. This leads to the
following results for a pile shaft element at 10 m depth:
soil stiffness ks = nG = 21.3 MPa.
soil resistance T m xa = 34 kPa.
3 1 /2
hysteretic damping CH = 0.50.21(7,786.810 ) = 76 kNs/m
3 1 /2
radiation damping CR = 0 . 5 ( 1 . 8 6 . 8 1 0 ) = 173 kNs/m
186 Deep foundations
1
Pp
0 20 40 45
Angle of internal friction '
Fig. 135. Bearing capacity factors Nq and Nc and critical depth for different lplDp ratios. lp = pile length
in soil; Dp = pile diameter. (Meyerhof, 1976).
Deep foundations 187
Qf = ptfAt+fsfAs (205)
w h e r e ptf= c'0tNq<pcr,
a'ot = effective overburden pressure at the pile tip level,
Nq = bearing capacity factor (Fig. 135),
At = pile tip area,
K
fsf= s'osten<fcr,
o'0s = average effective overburden pressure along the shaft,
Ks = earth pressure coefficient (average value),
= angle of friction at the soil/shaft interface,
As  shaft area.
If the soil consists of layers with different characteristics the total shaft resistance is
obtained b y s u m m a t i o n of the contributions given by each separate layer.
B e l o w a certain depth dcr (Fig. 135), the tip resistance does not increase with increasing
depth. T h e limits reached at the critical depth is denoted with pcr a n d / c r.
T h e diagrams given in Fig. 135 show that Nq reaches its m a x i m u m value at about half
the critical depth. O n the other hand, the product Nqo'0 increases until the critical depth
is reached.
T h e choice of the special parameters required for the determination of the shaft resis
tance ( S a n d Ks) is quite delicate and m o r e difficult than the choice of '. T h e parameters
are very m u c h dependent on the relative density, initial state of stress, shape and diameter
of the pile and the m e t h o d of pile installation. For e x a m p l e , in a n o n  c o h e s i v e soil with
a given value of the angle of internal friction, the bearing capacity of a b o r e d pile is
normally only o n e third to o n e half the bearing capacity of a driven pile.
If the piles are installed in normally consolidated or lightly overconsolidated cohesive
soils, then the tip resistance is usually negligible in comparison with the shaft resistance.
T h e tip resistance will not b e mobilised until the shaft resistance has passed its m a x i m u m
value (Fig. 136) and, furthermore, its value will b e comparatively very small. Therefore,
piles in soft c o h e s i v e soils can b e considered to b e h a v e as friction piles (since the term
friction piles seems to m a k e reference to cohesionless soils, piles in soft cohesive soils
are also referred to as cohesion piles or floating piles).
Also in the case of b o r e d u n d e r r e a m e d piles in stiff clay the shaft resistance will be
mobilised long before the base resistance. T h u s the b a s e resistance develops very slowly
and is s e l d o m fully mobilised until the settlement reaches 1 0  2 0 % of the b a s e diameter
(Burland, 1986). O n the other h a n d the shaft resistance is fully mobilised w h e n the
settlement reaches only about 0 . 5 % of the shaft diameter (or about 5 m m ) and then
remains m o r e or less constant with increasing settlement.
T h e total bearing capacity of a floating pile can b e determined on the basis of the
undrained shear strength of the soil according to the relation:
188 Deep foundations
Fig. 136. The maximum shaft resistance in clay is reached at very small relative displacement between
clay and pile, long before tip resistance is mobilised. The influence on shaft resistance of pile material
is negligible. (Torstensson, 1973).
w h e r e oc= empirical factor w h o s e value depends on soil characteristics, shape of pile, pile
diameter, type of pile (driven or bored), installation method, time to failure, time after pile
installation, etc.
cus = undrained shear strength along the shaft (average value),
cut = undrained shear strength at the pile tip,
= the bearing capacity factor,
Deep foundations 189
As = shaft area,
At = tip area.
T h e bearing capacity factor in clay can be a s s u m e d equal to 9. For driven timber
piles in soft clays can be put equal to 1 for shortterm loading and 0.7 for longterm
loading ( a = 0.7 can b e considered representative of the 'creep failure' of the pile, i.e.
the load that leads to excessive creep settlement). For piles with constant crosssection
driven into in soft clays (such as concrete piles), has to be taken s o m e w h a t lower ( 0 . 8 
0.9 of the values given above). For bored straightshafted piles and bored u n d e r r e a m e d
piles in stiff clays with cu determined by unconsolidated, undrained triaxial tests on 38
m m diameter samples, a c a n b e assumed equal to 0.45 ( S k e m p t o n , 1 9 5 9 ; B u r l a n d , 1986).
In layered soil with varying characteristics, the total shaft resistance is obtained by
summation of the contributions given by the various layers.
In the case of a pile w h o s e diameter varies linearly with depth and which is installed
in clay with an undrained shear strength increasing linearly with depth (cu = cu0 + kz), the
bearing capacity can be determined by the relation:
1 1
Qf = ccnlp[(Dph + Dpt )cu0 +  (Dph + 2Dpt )klp] (207)
6
Example 24: A 15 m long timber pile with a tip diameter of 150 mm is driven into a clay deposit with
an undrained shear strength c M= 10 + 1. 8z kPa, where z, in m, denotes the depth below the ground surface.
3
The clay is normally consolidated and has a density of 1.6 t/m . The groundwater level is 2 m below the
ground surface and the pore pressure distribution with depth is hydrostatic.
Determine the ultimate load of the pile if the diameter of the pile increases by 8 mm per m from the
pile tip upwards. Use both undrained and drained analysis. In the latter case the angle of internal friction
can be taken as ''  20. The friction angle in the pile/soil interface <5can be assumed equal to '.
Solution: The pile head diameter Dph = 150 + 815 = 270 mm.
Undrained analysis: Qf= 15[(0.27 + 0 . 1 5 ) 4 0 / 2 +(0.27 + 2 0 . 1 5 ) 1.8 15/6] = 220 kN. For long
term loading can be put equal to 0.7 which yields / = 154 kN
Drained analysis: The effective stress distribution increases linearly from about 20 kPa (= 219.81)
at the ground surface to 31 kPa (= 1.629.81) at 2 m depth and from there linearly to 108 kPa (= 31 +
/
130.69.81) at 15 m depth. Since the clay is normally consolidated o {j&c  G'^G'V = 1.
We find:
Qf= [2(0.27 + 0.254)(20 + 31)/4 + 13(0.254 + 0.15)(31 + 108)/4](1  sin 20)tan 20 = 147 kN.
(i v) The pressuremeter method. T h e tip resistance of the pile can b e calculated on the basis
of p r e s s u r e m e t e r test results according to the s a m e p r i n c i p l e as p r e v i o u s l y s h o w n (pp. 145
 1 4 8 ) . In this c a s e w e h a v e :
(a)
(b)
0
0 2 4 6 8 10
Depth of e m b e d m e n t d/Dp
Fig. 137. values vs. pile embedment for driven piles (Bustamente et al, 1981).
(a) Very dense sand and gravel.
(b) Medium dense sand, firm silt and firm clay.
(c) Loose silt, clayey sand and soft clay.
Deep foundations 191
Ptf=
+
* (209)
T h e correlation between shaft resistance/ v ^and the net limit pressure *p{ can be obtained
from Fig. 138. T h e shaft resistance depends not only on the net limit pressure but also on
the m e t h o d of pile installation and the pile material.
150
120 ( a ) _
*
* /
Ou,
Jt
/ /
90
/
' / _  v u/
i 60 / /
(d)
/
30
Example 25: Determine the bearing capacity of a concrete pile with a crosssectional area of 0.25 m
by 0.25 m driven to a depth of 8 m in a sand deposit whose properties, determined by pressuremeter tests,
are given in the figure shown below. The groundwater level is at 1 m depth. The unit weight of the sand
3 3
is 18 k N / m above and 11 k N / m below the groundwater table.
0 10 20 0 2 4
16.5
,
_ _
/ 4 1)
1
r j 16
Solution: The point resistance is governed by the bearing capacity factor K~ 2.7 and the pressure limit
ple  0.5 MPa. The shaft resistance is governed by the average of pt from the pile head to the tip which
is equal to (2.3 + 0.8 + 0.8 +0.6 + 1.2 + 1.8 +1.0 + 0.5)/8 = 1 . 1 MPa. From Fig. 133, curve (b), we find
the average v a l u e ~ 80 kPa, and from curve ( d ) , / ^ ~ 110 kPa.
2
U s i n g / 9 /= 80 kPa, the bearing capacity of the pile becomes Qf= 0.25 ( 18 + 7 11 +2.7500) + 8040.258
= 730 kN, while, using fSf= 110 kPa, the bearing capacity becomes Qj  970 kN.
(v) Empirical methods. T h e soil resistance to pile driving reminds of the soil resistance
obtained in different penetration methods used in soil investigations. It is therefore but
natural that m a n y attempts have been m a d e throughout the world to establish relations
between the resistance to penetration of different sounding tools and the bearing capacity
of piles. S o m e of these m e t h o d s will b e presented.
For driven piles, M e y e r h o f (1976) proposes the following relation b a s e d on the results
2
of S P T (Qf in kN and At and As in m ) :
/ = 4 0 0 ^ ^ + 2 ^ 3 ^ (212)
w h e r e 3 0 represents the /V 3 0 count at the pile tip level and N30s the average / V 3 0 count
along the shaft of the pile.
Deep foundations 193
w h e r e = 2 0 0 for clayey silt, 300 for sandy silt and 4 0 0 for sand.
T h e tip resistance should b e limited to a m a x i m u m of about 10 M P a .
B u s t a m a n t e and Gianeselli (1982) p r o p o s e the following relation based on the results
of C P T investigations:
Qf=qcpkcAt+fcAs (214)
w h e r e qcp = average point resistance in C P T from 1.5D t above the pile tip to 1.5D, below
the pile tip,
kc = parameter w h o s e size depends on pile type and soil characteristics,
fc = qcs/cx,
qcs = average point resistance along the pile shaft.
T h e kc and values r e c o m m e n d e d by B u s t a m a n t e & Gianeselli (1982) for two pile
categories, n a m e l y category I A (including plain bored, m u d  b o r e d , hollow augerbored,
cast screwed piles, micropiles grouted under low pressure and piers) and category IIA
(including driven precast piles, prestressed tubular piles and j a c k e d concrete piles) are
given in Table 24.
A very c o m p l e t e literature survey of the various m e t h o d s of analysis based on C P T
results, including pile installation effects, has been presented by Van I m p e (1991).
For bored piles in cohesionless soil, Berggren (1981) presented a d i a g r a m for the
determination of the critical pile point load (the creep load) b e l o w which settlement can
TABLE 24.
Values of bearing capacity factor kc and coefficient for pile categories IA and IIA.
The values in parenthesese refer to very careful pile installation, involving minimum disturbance of soil.
194 Deep foundations
Example 26: Pile loading tests were carried out on concrete piles with square crosssection and a side
length of0.235 m. Three piles, driven to depths of 15 and 19 m, were loaded to failure. Results of piezo
cone soundings showed that the soil consisted of clay underlain by sand at 5 m depth. A typical result
of the piezocone sounding and the pile tip level of the three tested piles are presented below. Calculate
the bearing capacity of the piles on the basis of the penetration resistance according to Bustamente &
Gianeselli.
Solution: The CPT point resistance at the pile tip qc ~ 8 MPa for all the piles tested. As regards the pile
shaft we find qc 0.6 MPa to a depth of 5 m, qc 6 MPa, on the average, from 5 m to 15 m depth and
qc ~ 7.5 MPa from 15 m to 19 m depth. The piles belong to Category IIA. Since there is no value for
clay, the contribution to the bearing capacity of the clay layer will be based upon the value for silt.
The bearing capacity of the different piles can now be calculated.
2
Pile PI: Qf= 0.580.235 + ( 5 0 . 6 / 6 0 + 106/100)40.235 = 0.88 MN
Piles P2 and P3: Qf = 0.88 + 4 ( 7 . 5 / 1 0 0 ) 4 0 . 2 3 5 = 1.16 MN
According to the loading tests we have:
P i l e PI: / = 0 . 6 8 MN
P i l e P2: Qf = 1.07 M N
P i l e P3: Qf= 1.16 M N
The ratio of calculated to observed ultimate pile loads varies from 1.0 to 1.3. The agreement between
theory and reality in this case is quite satisfactory.
Deep foundations 195
25 30 40 50 60
Design parameter Ns
0 5 10 15
Relative depth of penetration lxIDp
Fig. 139. Top: Relation between sounding resistance and design parameter Ns. Range of validity for
different penetration methods shaded. Bottom : Critical tip resistance vs. pile penetration depth for different
values of Ns (After Berggren, 1981).
be a s s u m e d to increase linearly with increasing load (Fig. 139). In the top diagram, a
design parameter Ns is determined on the basis of the results of different penetration tests.
Then knowing Ns, the critical tip r e s i s t a n c e p t c is obtained from the b o t t o m diagram and
the corresponding pile tip settlement from Fig. 140.
196 Deep foundations
60
201 I I I I I I I I I I
0.05 0.10 0.15
Ratio of elastic settlement limit to pile diameter
Fig. 140. Pile tip settlement at critical point resistance as function ofNs and uniformity coefficient Cv.
Fig. 141. Equipment used for dynamic preloading of bored piles, (a) 3.8 t hammer, (b) Guide casing,
(c) Measuring cable, (d) Casing for work, (e) Damper, (f) Measuring cell, (g) Pile point of steel.
Deep foundations 197
increase the bearing capacity of the piles, thereby reducing the required length of the piles
and in c o n s e q u e n c e leading to costeffective solutions.
T h e r e c o m m e n d e d procedure of d y n a m i c preloading is as follows (Berggren &
Bengtsson, 1985). A special setup for d y n a m i c preloading is utilised, consisting of a 3.8
t h a m m e r , a guide casing and a 'pile point' equipped with accelerometer, strain gauges
and displacement transducers, Fig. 1 4 1 . T h e diameter of the 'pile point' should not be
below 0.8 times the pile diameter. D y n a m i c preloading is carried out in several steps by
gradually increasing the drop height of the hammer, e.g. 0.2 m, 0.5 m, 1.0 m, 2.0 m and
4.0 m, and so that the ratio of remaining plastic settlement spi to m a x i m u m settlement s m a x
caused by the impact of the h a m m e r decreases in each step. T h e increase in drop height
can take place when the ratio spi/smx< 0.2 (or possibly 0.3).
Example 27: Determine the critical point load of a bored pile, 0.9 m in diameter, by the aid of the graphs
shown in Fig. 139. The pile tip is at 1 m depth in gravel with a cone resistance qc  8 MPa. The gravel
is overlain by a soft clay deposit, 10 m in thickness. The groundwater level is situated at a depth of 2
3 3
m. The unit weight of the clay is 16 k N / m and of watersaturated gravel 21 kN/m .
Solution: From Fig. 139 we find the design value Ns  35. The depth of penetration into the gravel is
1 m which yields l\IDp = 1 . 1 . From the bottom diagram we find ppj~ 22'0 = 22 (216 + 86 + 111)
3 2
= 210 kPa. Thus, the critical point load is equal to 20.9 /4 = 1.3 MN. The elastic settlement limit
according to Fig. 140 is around 0.09 to 0.14 m depending on theuniformity coefficient of the gravel.
W h i l e the bearing capacity is decisive of the ultimate state, the s e t t l e m e n t a b o v e all the
differential settlementis decisive of the serviceability state. T h e possibility of predicting
pile settlement with satisfactory accuracy is limited. T h e r e are several reasons for this.
Pile installation generally alters the stress/strain conditions in the soil. In soft, sensitive
clays disturbance effects m a y give rise to a decrease of the preconsolidation pressure
followed by consolidation. In loose cohesionless soil pile driving causes compaction
which will i m p r o v e the settlement characteristics. Driven piles will b e subjected to
residual stresses which m a y influence the load/settlement relationship. M a n y other
factors not mentioned here can increase the difficulties of settlement prediction. Therefore,
in practice the permissible pile load is mostly coupled with a certain factor of safety
against pile failure.
A s a general rule it can b e stated that insitu methods for determination of the deformation
characteristics are preferable in the case of cohesionless soils w h e r e a s laboratory meth
ods are generally adaptable in the case of cohesive soils. Stresswave m e a s u r e m e n t s and
analyses can b e used not only for determination of the bearing capacity of piles but also
for prediction of pile settlement under working load condition.
T h e column and wall loads in a building are mostly too large to b e carried by single
piles and, therefore, pile groups h a v e to b e installed. E v e n if the settlement of a single pile
198 Deep foundations
can be predicted with satisfactory accuracy, the settlement of a pile group can b e entirely
different. This is important and has to b e recognised.
T h e settlements occurring in the serviceability state are limited which, in the case of
friction piles, m e a n s that load will be carried m o r e or less merely by shaft resistance. T h e
tip resistance will either not be mobilised at all or will b e of negligible m a g n i t u d e . On the
other hand, piles driven to refusal, or with the pile tip in layers of high bearing capacity,
such as hard till, will carry the service load almost entirely by tip resistance. D y n a m i c
preloading of the pile tip, as is sometimes utilised with bored piles, represents another
case w h e r e the service load is carried mainly by tip resistance.
(i) The pressuremeter method. T h e settlement of a friction pile, in the serviceability state
w h e n the shaft resistance is not yet fully mobilised, will mainly b e governed by the shear
m o d u l u s of the soil. T h e foremost aim of the pressuremeter is to determine the shear
m o d u l u s of the soil and the results of pressuremeter tests therefore serve as a reliable basi s
for pile settlement calculations. A strict analysis based on the results obtained by the
M n a r d pressuremeter, taking into account both shaft and tip resistance, was carried out
by Cassan (1966). In C a s s a n ' s analysis it is a s s u m e d that the shaft resistance fs = Bs(z)
and the tip r e s i s t a n c e p p = Sp/Dp where s(z) and sp represent pile settlement at, respecti vely,
depth and pile point level and and represent soil resistance. C a s s a n ' s analysis, later
modified by Sellgren (1981), yields the following relation:
4 \ + [/()]1<() Q_ _ Q
= (215)
nDp + ) \QIQf \QIQf
where
EpDp
= GP/L$ with Lq = 0.3 m for driven piles and L q = 0.9 m for bored piles,
= 12GS with GS = 3GPR for driven piles and GS  GPR for bored piles (GPRS =
average of GPR along the pile shaft and GPRT = GPR at the pile tip),
EP = m o d u l u s of elasticity of pile,
Dp = pile diameter.
Using instead of GPR the pressuremeter m o d u l u s EPR = 2Gpr(l+vs) w e find for driven
1 1
piles = 1.25p r n r and = 1 3 . 5 E P R and for bored piles = 0 i r r and =4.5EPR
For piles with square crosssectional area, nDP/4 should b e e x c h a n g e d for bp w h e r e
bp is the width of the pile.
A comparison of the values for bored piles to those for driven piles is m a d e in Table
25.
In m a n y cases bored piles are installed through w e a k soil into hard b o t t o m layers, such
as till. T h e pile load is then carried by tip resistance and shaft resistance can b e neglected.
Deep foundations 199
TABLE 25
Examples of values for bored and driven piles, assuming Ep = 30 GPa.
9APEPR D0
Example 28: Determine the settlement of the pile, the bearing capacity of which was determined in
Example 25, under a permissible load of one third of the calculated failure load (730 kN). The pile has
a crosssectional area of 0.25m by 0.25 m and a length of 8 m. The results of pressuremeter investigations
are shown in the figure below. The elastic modulus of the pile is 30 GPa.
Solution: The average value of the pressuremeter moduli along the pile shaft is Epr = 6.7 MPa. At the
pile point, the pressuremeter value is taken as the harmonic mean of 2.1 and 16.2 MPa, i.e. Epr = 3.7
MPa. This yields = 1.256.7 = 8.4 MPa/m and = 13.53.7 = 50.2 MPa. The equivalent pile diameter
3 1 /2 1
Dp = 40.25/ = 0.318 m, whence = 2[8.4/(3010 0.318)1 = 0.0593 m" .
The value according to Eq. (214) becomes:
50.2
1 1+ tanh(0.0593 8)
0.0593301030.318
a  3 : 0.0139 ra/MN,
0.25 50.2 + 0.0593 30  1 0 0.318 tanh(0.0593 8)
from which:
s = 0.0139(0.73/3)/(1  1/3) = 0.005 m
(ii) Empirical methods. T h e settlement of friction piles can also b e d e t e r m i n e d with good
a p p r o x i m a t i o n by the aid of the d i a g r a m given in Fig. 142. T h e d i a g r a m is valid for
calculation of settlement up to half the ultimate load. T h e settlement is obtained by the
relation:
s=fs/Ks (217)
5 5
10 2*10
Fig. 142. Diagram for determination of settlement of friction pile (Hansbo & Bengtsson, 1979). Legend:
Ep= Elastic modulus of pile; Dp= pile diameter; lp= pile length in soil; G= shear modulus of soil; K =
pile displacement modulus.
Deep foundations 201
Example 29: In order to investigate the load vs. settlement behaviour of piles in soft clay, test loading
was carried out on two piles, one with a diameter of 0.33 m and the other with a diameter of 0.5 m, both
driven to a depth of 25 m through a top layer of peat, 3 m in thickness, underlain of a 10 m thick layer
of volcanic clay on alluvial, silty clay (Simonini & Soranzo, 1988). A finite element analysis was carried
out, based on elastic properties determined by means of unconfined compression tests at half failure
load. The undrained shear strength was determined by means of field vane tests. The mean value of the
undrained shear strength was 13 kPa in the volcanic clay and 26 kPa in the alluvial clay. The result of
the test loading and the finite element analysis is shown below.
Determine the load vs. settlement behaviour of the piles by means of Eq. (217) and Fig. 142.
Solution: The failure loads of the two piles is determined according to Eq. (207). The contribution to
the bearing capacity of the peat layer is neglected since the load/deformation characteristics of peat are
quite different from those of the clay.
For the pile, 0.33 m in diameter, we have (a assumed equal to unity):
2
Qf= 0.33(10 13 + 1226) + 9260.33 /4 = 478 kN
and for the pile, 0.5 m in diameter
2
Qf= 0.5(10 13 + 1226) + 9260.5 /4 = 740 kN
The mean value of the shear modulus along the shaft of the piles can be estimated at:
Gs = 1 5 0 ( 1 0 13 + 1226)/22 = 3000 kPa
4
Assuming that the elastic modulus of the pile is 30 GPa we find Ep/Gs = 1 0 . For the pile, 0.33 m in
diameter , we have lplDp = 22/0.33 = 67 which, according to Fig. 142, yields KsDpIGs = 0.33 and thus
Ks = 3.0 MPa/m
The settlement at half the failure load for the pile, 0.33 m in diameter, ( g = 239 kN) becomes:
3 3
s = 239/(310 0.3322) = 3.510~ m
and at 85% of the failure load ( g = 406 kN)
3 3
s = 2.43.510 = 8 . 4  1 0  m
202 Deep foundations
For the pile, 0.5 m in diameter, w e have lplDp = 44 whence KsDp/Gs = 0.41. In this case we find Ks
= 2.5 MPa/m. Thus the settlement at half the failure load( = 370 kN) is equal to:
3 3
s = 370/(2.5 10 0.522) = 4 . 3 1 0  m
and at 85% of the failure load ( = 629 kN)
3 3
s = 2.44.310 = 10.310~ m
Assuming a safety factor of 3, the calculated and measured results are as follows:
Example 30: Determine by the approximate method, used in Example 30, the settlement of the pile
according to Example 28.
Solution: We have IJD? = 8/0.318 = 25. The Gs value can be put equal to Gpr which yields Gs = 6.7/2.6 =
4
2.6 MPa. Thus EJGS  30103/2.6 =1.15 10 which gives ^=0.46. Hence we find Ks=0.462.6/0.318
= 3.8 MPa. The settlement for a load of one third of the failure load 800 kN becomes:
s = 0.8/(33.8) = 0.007 m
which is 14% above the value obtained in Example 28.
Fig. 143. Pile movement and ultimate earth pressure distribution against horizontally loaded short pile
in cohesionless soil. Restrained pile.
lateral limiting capacity will b e reached either w h e n the earth pressure reaches its upper
limit or w h e n the pile is broken in bending.
Fig. 144. Pile movement and ultimate earth pressure distribution against horizontally loaded short pile
in cohesionless soil. Unrestrained pile, (b) Probable earth pressure distribution, (c) Assumed earth
pressure distribution.
204 Deep foundations
Fig. 145. Nomogram for determination of lateral capacity of short piles in cohesionless soil.
T h e lateral capacity of an unrestrained, short pile can now be calculated from the
conditions of equilibrium:
2
Hf = Kp YD/^a(lp2)] (219)
2
9 a j2 (LP 3a)
Hfe = [(   )  3 ) (220)
Hf  KpjDp^ (221)
while, if it is yielding (one hinge with a yielding m o m e n t Mpf, Eq. (221) takes the form:
Deep foundations 205
Fig. 146. Assumed limiting earth pressure distribution against long piles in cohesionless soil.
2 (L  3) 2 a 2?
M pf = Kp YDp[^^a(lp) ] (222)
Fig. 147. Nomogram for determination of the lateral capacity of long piles in cohesionless soil.
206 Deep foundations
Example 3 1 : In a test carried out by Koskinen (1991), the lateral bearing capacity of a steel pile, 273
mm in diameter, embedded in sand was investigated. The sand had the following characteristics:
3
internal angle of friction '= 37 and unit weight / = 9 k N / m . The length of embedment of the pile
was lp = 4 m and the lever arm of the horizontal load e  0.8 m. The yield moment Mpj of the pile was
assumed equal to 92.7 kNm. Determine the lateral capacity on the basis of Eqs. (219220) and (223224).
Solution: We have e ID = 0.8/0.273 = 2.93 and lpID =4/0.273 = 14.65. The earth pressure coefficient
2 2 4
Kp = tan (45 + 3 7 7 2 ) = 4.02. The value Mpfl(Kp YD ) = 114.7. From the diagram, Fig. 147 (the pile
2 3
is assumed to be broken in bending), we find H^k/yD^)  17 whence Hf= 174.02 90.273 = 50
kN (an exact solution yields Hj= 49.9 kN). From the diagram, Fig. 145 (the pile is not broken), we find
2 3
Hfl(Kp YDp ) 20 whence Hf= 59 kN (an exact solution yields Hf= 58.6 kN). In reality the pile was
loaded up to 60 kN which can be assumed to correspond to the failure load (the occurrence of failure
is not distinct). The horizontal displacement of the top of the pile at = 54 kN was 0.13 m.
2
f
Hf  KpjDp (223)
2 J
Hfe = MpfK rDp  (224)
If the pile is restrained (two hinges), Eq. (223) will be replaced by:
2 J
Mpf=Kp YDp  (225)
(ii) Cohesive soils. In the case of cohesive soils the lateral earth pressure against a short,
restrained pile varies normally as shown in Fig. 148 (left). It can be a s s u m e d (Fig. 148,
right) that the lateral resistance, below a depth of 1.5 pile diameters, is equal to 9 times
the undrained shear strength of the soil multiplied by the pile diameter (Broms, 1964).
If the undrained shear strength cu is constant with depth the conditions of equilibrium
of a short, unrestrained pile at failure will b e fulfilled by the relations:
Z 5 D 2
Hfie + zo) = 9 c u d /  [ ^ + ^  ] (227)
9c,pn
up
%cj}p\2cj>r
Fig. 148. Limiting earth pressure distribution against a short restrained pile in cohesive soil (left) and
assumed limiting earth pressure against unrestrained, short pile (Broms, 1964).
Hf = 9cuDp(lp\5Dp) (228)
If the pile is yielding (one h i n g e with a yielding m o m e n t Mpj, Eq. (227) takes the form:
(229)
Hf=9cuDp(fl.5Dp) (230)
Fig. 149. Assumed limiting earth pressure distribution against a long pile in cohesive soil.
208 Deep foundations
Fig. 150. Nomogram for determination of lateral capacity of short piles in cohesive soil.
Fig. 151. Nomogram for determination of lateral capacity of long piles in cohesive soil.
Deep foundations 209
2
(f\.5D)
pJ
Mpf = Hf(e +f)9cuD/ ^ (231)
2 2
f {\.5DD)
Mpf = 9cuDp (232)
5.2 Deflection
4
dy psDD
J L
A = ^ (233)
dz Eplp
2Hk
Fig. 152. Internal forces and deflection of a concrete pile subjected to a horizontal load H= 10 kN at
a height of 0.2 m above ground surface. Pile with square cross section, 0.35m in width. Modulus of
lateral subgrade reaction kls  40 MPa. Elastic modulus of pile Ep  30 GPa. (= 5.7).
_ 4 / KisDp _ 4 / k[s
k
~ \ a e p I p ~ \ a e p I P
M  [eK(cosKz + sinKz) + SINK*z] e x p (  K 2 ) (235)
value of kis can b e a s s u m e d equal to 8 0 c u . Of course, the kls value thus obtained can only
be applied w h e n the lateral soil r e a c t i o n p s = kls y is b e l o w the pressure leading to failure.
In cohesionless soil the coefficient of subgrade reaction according to Terzaghi (1955)
can be a s s u m e d to increase linearly with depth according to the relation kls = nhz, w h e r e
nh can b e estimated at 7 5 / t o 2 2 5 / f o r loose sand and at 7 5 0 / t o 1 5 0 0 / f o r dense sand
w h e r e / i s the effective unit weight of the soil.
In practice, a possible way of determining the m o d u l u s of lateral subgrade reaction is
by using the results of pressuremeter tests. According to the correlations between
settlement and pressuremeter m o d u l u s Epr previously given, Eq. (152), p. 146, w e find:
9F
k ls = (237)
2 ( 2 . 6 5 ) + 1.5
if Dp < 0.6 m,
9E
kls = ^ (238)
a
2(DQ/Dp)(2.65Dp/D0) + 15a
i f D p > 0 . 6 m,
w h e r e is the rheological coefficient at depth (Table 2 1 , p. 139),
D0 = 0.6 m.
T h e kls value determined accordingly can only be applied w h e n the lateral soil reaction
= s
Ps kisy * b e l o w the critical pressure p c r In case the lateral reaction exceeds the creep
pressure, the lateral subgrade reaction b e t w e e n creep pressure and failure can b e assumed
equal to half the values determined by Eqs. ( 2 3 7  2 3 8 ) .
N e a r the ground surface, the lateral subgrade reaction is less than at depth because of
ground h e a v e . T h u s Eqs. ( 2 3 7  2 3 8 ) are only valid below a critical depth zc w h i c h varies
from about 2Dp for cohesive soils to about 4Dp for granular soils. A b o v e the critical depth,
the kh value should b e replaced b y kls where:
. \+zlz c
= (239)
where and EprR represent the first load and reload preboring pressuremeter moduli,
respectively.
212 Deep foundations
Example 32: Determine the horizontal displacement at the ground surface and at 1 m depth below the
ground surface of a steel pile with square crosssectional area, 0,10 m in width, installed in clay with
constant shear strength cu  30 kPa, if the pile is subjected to a horizontal load of 5 kN at a height of 0.5
m above the ground level.
4 4
Solu non : For a steel pile we have Ep=210 GPa. The moment of inertia islp=0.1 /12 = 8.3 l O ^ m . Assuming
6 6 1 /4 1
that kls = 20cu we find = [600/(421010 8.31 )] = 0.542 m" .
The lateral movement becomes:
= 0 (ground level)
y = (250.542/600)(0.50.542 + 1) = 0.011 m
= 1 m
y = (250.542/600)[0.50.542(cos 0.542 + sin 0.542) + sin 0.542]exp( 0.542) = 0.0047 m
6. BUCKLING OF PILES
(i) Straight pile. T h e buckling load of a straight pile e m b e d d e d in soil can be analysed
in the same w a y as in the case of a column e m b e d d e d in an elastic m e d i u m (Timoschenko,
1936). A s s u m i n g that the pile is hinged at both ends we have:
is
4 (242)
m , pip
2 1 \ 3
+ ( 2 4 3
*  * w * > >
= I ( + ) = 0 (244)
TCEpIp
X = X = K(EpIp/kls)U* (245)
from which:
(246)
Qb,min ~ k[sEpIp
a dn 1
Introducing = Qb/Qb,mm = into Eq.(243) w e find:
(247)
1 1 2
T h e value ix or i2 that gives the lowest value yields the buckling load (Mascardi,
1970): (248)
V
Qb ~ Qb, min
If the pile is free to m o v e laterally at either of its ends the buckling load will b e only
half the value obtained for the hinged pile.
Example 33: Determine the buckling load of a straight, 5 m long steel pipe pile (outer diameter = 50
mm; wall thickness = 4 mm) installed in clay with an undrained shear strength of 10 kPa.
4 4 7 4
Solution: We have kls = 200 kPa and Ip = ( 0 . 0 5  0.042 )/64 = 1.54 10" m . Furthermore, Ep = 210
GPa. Thus:
6 7 1/2
(2 /? = 2 ( 2 0 0 2 1 0 1 0 1 . 5 4 1 0  ) = 161 kN
6 7 1 /4
A = (210 10 1.5410~ /200) = 1.99
m = 5/1.99 = 2.51 and, consequently, m{ = 2 and m2 = 3 from which:
1 1 = 2.51/2 = 1 . 2 5 1 ^ = 1.10
1 2 = 2.51/3 = 0.84 v2= 1.06
214 Deep foundations
Fig. 153. Illustrative example of pile 'wandering'. A 37 m long steel pile installed by means of the
pile driver shown to the left (top picture) is being curved during installation, then moving in a wide bow
below the ground surface, finally penetrating the ground surface 20 m away and hitting the parked
Honda which is being lifted 1.5 m before discovery. (By courtesy of Herkules Grundlggning AB).
(ii) Initially bent pile. B y experience w e k n o w that it is difficult to maintain the straightness
of driven piles (Fig. 1 5 3 ) . T h e danger of the pile being curved during installation is
particularly important in the case of smalldiameter piles, socalled micropiles. T h e
bearing capacity of such initially curved piles is governed by elastoplastic buckling
(buckling in combination with plastic yield). A pile may, of course, b e curved along its
w h o l e length and fail in bending because the lateral soil resistance is insufficient. In the
case of buckling, however, the pile is a s s u m e d to b e initially curved between the
inflection points determined by the sinusoidal half w a v e s appearing in buckling (Fig. 1 5 4 ) .
A s s u m i n g that the initial deflection of a pile, hinged at both e n d s , is 0 and the total
deflection caused by the application of the load is ^ + y w e h a v e (cf. E q . 2 4 3 ) :
2 , 2Xk,s y
= 2( (250)
9 A3 **Epl/y + 0
Deep foundations 215
   * Y 
l i n
line of thrust ^ ^ _ \{ I + I 2 I ^ e of thrust
Fig. 154. Buckling of initially bent pile. Radius of curvature = p. Initial deflection from line of thrust
= 0. For a pile curved along its whole length (right picture), the thrust line can be assumed to coincide
with a circle drawn through A, and C. In this case <50 can be taken as the average of the deflections
and b\ (Bernander & Svensk, 1970).
QbMm  2 / k i s E p I Pp (251)
J + <So
T h e stresses in the pile are obtained from the relation (Bernander & Svensk, 1970):
Q .Mfn
=
E (252)
A M = y = =
p x 2 y y ^ p h QbMmj,
The maximum stress in the pile is consequently obtained from the relation:
lim
7?,max 0 + p
(253)
2 W
~ ( p, yield ~ jp) An
G
(254)
A
a,iim = V1 + yv ++ Q P
g f t, A
2 W p
y +<5Q _ S0y/kl5EpIp
2 2y/khEpIpQbyim
(255)
Inserting the expression for (y + <50)/2 into Eq. (254), w e finally have:
w h e r e Qx = ( " ^ 1 ( 1 ) ,
and
Fig. 155. Examples of limiting load due to elastoplastic buckling of initially bent piles. Modulus of
lateral subgrade reaction kls = 0.2 MPa. Yield stress of piles >yield = 260 MPa.
7
Deep foundations
1 8<50
Eplp 2
whence:
Aff =
'^ / W =
^ (257)
F r o m the results of Eqs. (246) and (256) w e find that the limiting load of initially bent
piles is generally governed by yield rather than by elastic instability (Fig. 155).
For a pile that is not fully e m b e d d e d in soil, it can b e a s s u m e d that the pile is restrained
(rigidly fixed) at a depth below the ground surface equal to (Davidson et al, 1965):
ls=\A{Eplplklsy (258)
If the modulus of lateral subgrade reaction is increasing linearly with depth (kls  nhz), ls can
be approximated to:
ls=\WpIp/nh)^ (259)
T h e buckling length depends on the degree of restraint at the pile head. For a pile that
is rigidly fixedat the pile head it can b e a s s u m e d that = 0.5(ls + / 0 ) w h e r e l0 is the free
length of the pile. T h e length of the e m b e d d e d part of the pile should b e > 2.5ls.
Qb = n*EpIpM (260)
Example 34: Determine the buckling load of a steel pile, HEB 200, installed in sand to a depth of
10 m and with a free length of 5 m. The sand has a pressuremeter modulus Epr = 6 MPa.
Solution: The coefficient of subgrade reaction, determined on the basis of the pressuremeter tests (Eq.
238), becomes equal to:
96
kh = 7T,
1 / 3
= 16.5 MPa
22.65 +1.5/3 4
In the weak direction of the beam we have Ip = 28.43 1 ( H m . Moreover Ep = 210 GPa.
218 Deep foundations
This yields:
3 6 1 /4
/, = 1.4(21010 28.4310 /16.5) = 1.1 m
= ( 1 . 1 +5)/2 = 3.05m
The buckling load is equal to:
2 3 6 2
Qb = 21010 28.43 1 0 / 3 . 0 5 = 6.3 M N
3 2
Since the crosssectional area of the pile is 9.10410 m this corresponds to a steel stress of
approximately 690 MPa (in most cases above the yield stress).
7 . 1 Bearing capacity
(i) Friction pile groups. In a pile group, the pile forces will b e influenced by variations
in load/settlement behaviour between the individual piles in the group. This is particularly
the case with friction piles. If the soil were still h o m o g e n e o u s after pile installation, the
frictional forces along the pile shafts would cause a settlement bowl underneath the pile
footing with a tendency towards increasing load share a m o n g the outer piles and a
decreasing load share a m o n g the inner piles in the group. In granular soil, however, pile
installation, particularly in the case of displacementtype piles, generally causes changes
in the deformation characteristics of the soil inside the pile group in such a way that the
load distribution a m o n g the piles will change in another direction than that mentioned.
T h u s , the piles in the centre of the pile group will generally be subjected to a higher load
than the outer piles.
T h e ultimate bearing capacity of a pile group with friction piles is generally different
from the s u m of the ultimate loads of the individual piles in the group.
According to Kishida & Meyerhof (1965) the total bearing capacity of a piled
foundation can be estimated as the bearing capacity of the foundation and its surcharge
effect on the point resistance of the piles in the g r o u p e i t h e r by considering the bearing
capacity of the pile cap as a whole and the bearing capacity of the individual piles in the
group (individual pile failure) or by considering only the contribution to the bearing
capacity of the outer rim of the cap, outside the pile group (the pier), and the bearing
capacity of the pile group as a whole (pier failure), Fig. 156.
In an extensive test series on bored pile/cap/soil interaction effects in sand, comprising
51 pile groups and 23 single piles, Liu etal. (1985) investigated the group effect on both
pile groups with free space between cap and soil and pile groups with pile cap in direct
contact with soil. T h e pile groups consisted of 2  1 5 piles, 1 2 5  3 3 0 m m in diameter, and
with lengths of 8  2 3 times the pile diameter. Pile spacings were 2  6 times the pile
diameter. F r o m the results obtained they found no evidence of block failure and therefore
propose that the analysis of pile group failure be based upon the bearing capacity of the
cap as a w h o l e in combination with individual pile failure.
T h e ultimate load Qgrf of a pile group is generally expressed as:
Deep foundations 219
/ \ \
tr
1^
Leap failure
N\ 1
\
base failure zone J
V
(a) (b)
Fig. 156. Assumed failure zones at piled foundations: (a) pier failure, (b) individual pile failure. (Kishida
& Meyerhof, 1965)
2^=77/7*0,/ (261)
Fig. 157. Average lateral earth pressure coefficient with reference to the centre pile in pile groups with
pile spacing equal to 4b, driven into sand with relative density ID ~ 4 7 % . The letter L represents results
after loading test. Arrows indicate change in lateral earth pressure with time, in days. (Ekstrm, 1989).
Deep foundations 221
TABLE 26.
Example of ultimate total pile loads and ultimate shaft loads observed by Ekstrm ( 1989). Freestanding
square pile groups. Individual pile tests. Pile loads in kN.
Total Shaft
TABLE 27
Group efficiencies for bored piles according to Liu etal. (1985). Dp = 0.25 m. Loose silty sand. 77^ and
77, include pile/soil interaction effects while % also includes action of pile cap in contact with soil.
T A B L E 28.
Efficiency factors at pile failure obtained by Phung (1993). Pile cap action included.
0.5 m
50 L
0 50 100 150 200 250
Cap load, kN
150
0.5 m
100
0.75 m
50
1.25 m
M rTi
1.75 m
50
20 40 60
Settlement, mm
Fig. 158. Influence on lateral earth pressure against the shaft of the centre pile in the group due to the
surcharge induced by the pile cap (After Phung, 1993).
Deep foundations 223
Fig. 159. Comparison of load vs. settlement relationship of single pile to those of cap (shallow
foundation), freestanding pile group and pile group with cap in direct contact with the soil. Pile spacing
= 4b. Sand with In = 38%.
224 Deep foundations
pile failure at large pile spacing, or, w h e n the pile spacing is small, by the shear strength
along the perimeter and nearest below the b o t t o m of the pile group, socalled block
failure. A group efficiency factor of 0.7 is r e c o m m e n d e d for pile spacings in the range
of2.5Dp4Dp (see B r o m s & Hansbo, 1981).
(ii) End bearing pile groups. T h e ultimate bearing capacity is generally calculated as the
sum of the bearing capacity of a single pile.
7.2 Settlement
Different proposals have been presented about how to define, under equal soil conditions,
the settlement of pile groups in relation to the settlement of an individual freestanding
pile the socalled settlement ratio . A m o n g these, it seems preferable to use either one
of the following definitions:
is the ratio of pile group settlement to single pile settlement at equal pile loads
Load, kN Load, kN
Fig. 160. Comparison of load vs. settlement relationship of single pile to that of cap (shallow foundation),
freestanding pile group and pile group with cap in direct contact with the soil. Pile spacing = 8/?. Sand
w i t h / D = 62%.
Deep foundations 225
i s the ratio of the initial slope of the average pile load vs. settlement curve of the pile
group to the initial slope of the load vs. settlement curve of the single pile.
(i) Pile groups in granular soil. A fairly large number of tests have been carried out to find
the value but the results obtained are often difficult to analyse both because of the
settlement ratios being related to different factors of safety against pile failure and the
settlement ratios not being defined. A s settlement is very much dependent on the factor
of safety applied, the results presented by different authors show great scattering and are
often contradictory. Roughly speaking, results of loading tests on freestanding pile
groups indicate that >\ in dense sand while <\ for driven piles in loose to medium
dense sand. Thus, in the latter case h a s been found to vary from about 0.2 at BgrIDp ~
3 (where Bgr = the width of the pile group) to about 0.7 at Bgr IDp ~ 10. A s for bored piles
in loose sand, h a s been found to vary from about 0.6 at BgfJDp ~ 3 to about 2 at Bgr/Dp
5.
Based on the results of fullscale investigations, Vesic (1969) suggests that the Rvalue
be determined by the relation:
(264)
As in the case of the ultimate load of pile groups in sand, the influence on pile group
settlement of the surcharge exerted by the pile cap may be quite important (Figs. 158
160). The results presented by Phung show that the settlement ratio , defined as the ratio
of the pile group settlement to single pile settlement at equal loads, is fairly constant up
to an average pile load in the pile group of about 6 0 % of the single pile failure load and
from then on strongly decreasing. The results also show that a considerable decrease in
the Rvalue can be expected due to the pile cap being in contact with the soil. This has also
been found for bored piles at Bgr IDp between 2 and 5 (Garg, 1979).
0.15
a
CS
o.iof 1
_ o Outer piles
1 'S
.05 Centre pile
Fig. 161. Load distribution between individual piles in a pile group in soft clay loaded to failure. Piles
of aluminium, 3 m in length and 0.037 m in diameter. Pile spacing 3.5Dp. Soft highplasticity clay.
226 Deep foundations
(ii) Pile groups in cohesive soils. T h e settlement of friction pile groups in cohesive soils
depends on the preloading history of the soil.
T h e instantaneous settlement of the pile group can b e calculated on the assumption that
the soil behaves as an elastic m e d i u m with P o i s s o n ' s ratio v = 0.5. T h e settlement thus
obtained is also valid for the longterm settlement of pile groups in overconsolidated
clays w h e r e the in situ pressure induced by the pile group does not exceed the
preconsolidation pressure of the clay.
In clay soils, the m o d u l u s of elasticity Es to be applied in the analysis can b e chosen
on an empirical basis, for e x a m p l e in relation to the undrained shear strength cu of the clay.
TABLE 30
Rvalues for freestanding pile groups with lp/Dp= 25 in an elastic medium with v = 0.5. Rigid cap. Pile
spacing = S. Depth of the medium = d.
Group 2x2
2 2.91 2.80 2.76 2.46 2.01
3 2.59 2.46 2.41 2.10 1.70
5 2.19 2.08 2.00 1.69 1.39
10 1.70 1.63 1.54 1.29 1.16
Group 3x3
2 5.38 5.00 4.88 4.10 3.09
3 4.64 4.22 4.06 3.25 2.39
5 3.74 3.27 3.05 2.30 1.75
10 2.73 2.20 1.98 1.48 1.27
Group 4x4
2 8.34 7.56 7.29 6.02 4.18
3 6.96 6.12 5.77 4.01 3.05
5 5.34 4.43 4.00 2.82 2.05
10 4.43 2.66 2.29 1.60 1.33
With regard to the pile length, the values given in Table 30 can b e adjusted by the
factors given in Table 3 1 .
TABLE 31
Adjustment factors for lp/Dp.
I \
^TmiltkTIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
/ V Q \
(Bgr+zHLgr+z)
Thus, for normally consolidated clay Es ~ 150c w while for heavily overconsolidated clay
Es  500c M.
T h e load distribution a m o n g the piles in working load condition is in good agreement
with the theory of elasticity (Fig. 161).
A c o m p r e h e n s i v e theoretical study of the relation between individual pile settlement
and pile group settlement in an elastic m e d i u m w a s presented by Poulus (1968). H e
assumes the soil to behave as an elastic medium and the pile cap to be either rigid or
perfectly flexible. In the rigid cap case, their analysis yields the settlement ratios given
in Table 30.
T h e Rvalues given in Tables 30 and 31 can b e considered representative for settlements
in undrained condition (immediate settlements). However, according to Poulos the
immediate settlements of pile groups represent the p r e d o m i n a n t part of the total, final
settlements.
T h e Rvalues obtained on a theoretical basis (Table 30) are supported by results report
ed by, for example, Berezantzev et (1961), Sowers et (1961) and H a n n a (1963).
(iii) Equivalent raft method. According to the socalled equivalent raft m e t h o d , the load
applied on the pile group is assumed to act at the lower third of the pile length (Fig. 162).
T h e settlement of the pile group is calculated as the s u m of the equivalent raft settlement
and the compression of the upper t w o thirds of the piles. According to Poulos (1993), a
good correlation can b e expected between the results obtained b y this m e t h o d of analysis
and computerbased analysis of settlement, based on his o w n data p r o g r a m D E F P I G which
takes into account pile/soil interaction in an elastic m e d i u m (Poulos, 1990).
Regarding pile groups in lowpermeable, cohesive soils, w h e r e the load induces in situ
stresses in excess of the preconsolidation pressure, the longterm consolidation settlement
228 Deep foundations
can be analysed in a similar way. For pile spacings presumably less than 8 times the pile
diameter Dp, and to a certain depth the relative m o v e m e n t between pile shaft and
surrounding soil seems m o r e or less negligible (Hansbo, 1973). T h e soil above the lower
third of the pile length behaves as an 'incompressible' layer (compression m o d u l u s M
tending to infinity). In consequence, the course of settlement can be analysed on the
assumption of full drainage (cv = kMlyw tending to large values) at the fictitious foundation
depth 2 / ^ / 3 .
7.3 Design
As shown in Section 2.8, the behaviour of individual piles in a pile group can b e quite
different from their behaviour as single piles. This fact is generally neglected in
conventional design.
By tradition, the pile group design is carried out on the basis of very simplified
assumptions:
T h e piles in the group are assumed to function as axially loaded c o l u m n s hinged at
pile head and pile tip. (Computer p r o g r a m m e s exist which take into consideration pos
sible restraint of the pile head as well as lateral soil resistance).
Every pile is a s s u m e d to have the same axial stiffness, i.e. they are a s s u m e d to have
equal lengths and crosssectional areas and to be supported by an unyielding m e d i u m .
T h e pile cap is considered rigid and is not assumed to contribute in carrying the load
applied.
Forces applied at the centre of gravity of the pile group are assumed to cause pure
translation. M o m e n t s applied at the centre of gravity of the pile group are a s s u m e d to
cause pure rotation.
In c o n s e q u e n c e of this model of pile group analysis, horizontal forces acting on the pile
group h a v e to be taken by raker piles. Moreover, in order to reduce the m o m e n t of
rotation, the pile group has to be arranged in such a w a y that its centre of gravity is as close
as possible to the line of action of the external force resultant.
In reality, the piles in a pile group m a y deviate considerably from the position given
in the design. Therefore, the real position of the piles has to b e checked and the pile forces
recalculated after pile installation is terminated.
According to conventional design, the load acting on the pile group, irrespective of
whether the piles are in cohesionless or cohesive material, is assumed to be carried by the
piles alone with a certain factor of safety against failure. This approach is rational w h e n
the piles are end bearing or mainly end bearing or w h e n w e h a v e to deal with footings on
normally consolidated clay. However, it is used even in cases w h e r e the bearing capacity
of the footing itself would b e satisfactory, the reason being that the settlements without
piles are felt to b e too large. In situations where the piles installed are friction piles for
w h i c h the load/settlement relationship does not show a m a r k e d decrease after peak, this
approach is quite conservative and unnecessarily expensive. A m o r e costeffective
Deep foundations 229
approach is first to investigate h o w m u c h of the load can be carried by the pile cap without
causing excessive settlement and then design the pile group to carry the r e m a i n i n g part
of the load. T h e intricate p r o b l e m of analysing the influence of pile/soil/cap interaction
on the ultimate load of the piles in the pile g r o u p and on the settlement can b e totally
disregarded. T h u s , on the basis of the investigation carried out b y P h u n g (1993), the
settlement obtained under the load taken by contact pressure at the cap/soil interface in
a piled footing is very nearly equal to the settlement obtained under an equally large load
taken by a corresponding unpiled cap (spread footing). This fact simplifies the design
procedure. T h e n u m b e r of piles required to limit settlement can b e d e t e r m i n e d on the
basis of the ultimate load of the single pile and the settlement can b e calculated as if the
pile cap w e r e a shallow footing carrying the load not taken by the piles.
T h e principle of pile group design can thus b e s u m m a r i s e d as follows:
D e t e r m i n e the load (Qx) that can b e placed on the unpiled footing without causing
unacceptable settlements.
T h e r e m a i n d e r of the load (Q  Qx) should b e carried by settlement reducing piles.
As the permissible settlement will be large e n o u g h for shaft resistance to b e fully
mobilised, the piles can be designed as friction piles in a state of failure (in clay, in a state
of creep failure).
T h e settlement of the piled footing can b e estimated at about the s a m e value as the
settlement of the unpiled footing under load Qx. This leads to a conservative design. For
e x a m p l e , for footings on sand the design b e c o m e s m o r e conservative the looser the sand.
This approach has b e e n used with great success to b o r e d largediameter piles in stiff
L o n d o n clay (Burland, 1986).
Example 35: Determine the load that can be carried by the piled cap shown in Fig. 160, following the
principle of design proposed above. The soil characteristics, determined by pressuremeter tests, are
given below (Phung, 1993):
Solution: The ultimate load of the single pile determined on the basis of the pressuremeter tests is given
by Eq. (211), p. 191. The mean value of the limit pressure along the pile shaft is 0.39 MPa and of the
creep pressure 0.30 MPa. According to Fig. 138, case (d), the shaft resistance can be estimated at 15 kPa.
This yields a total shaft resistance of 1 5 0 . 0 6 4  2 . 1 = 7.6 kN (observed value = 1.8 kN). For the
determination of the base resistance, Eq. (209), we have a value of 2.6. The net limit pressure is 0.49
2
MPa. This yields a tip resistance of 2.64900.06 /4 =3.6 kN (observed value = 8.2 kN). Thus, the total
bearing capacity is 7.6 + 3.6 ~ 11 kN (observed value = 10 kN). Choosing instead of *p{ the net creep
pressure *pcn the creep failure load can be estimated at 5.7 + 2 . 6  8 kN.
230 Deep foundations
Fig. 163. Piled raft with equally distributed wooden piles, 18 m in length. Soft highly plastic clay
reaching to a depth below foundation level of about 45 to 85 m.
The ultimate load / c f m e unpiled cap is determined according to Eq. (141), p. 136. We have ple
= (0.330.22) 1 72 = 0.27 MPa and bearing capacity factor k = 0.8. This yields Qfc = 0.82700.8 2 = 138
kN (observed value 200 kN). The critical load (the 'creep' load) becomes 120 kN. Assuming a factor
of safety of minimum 1.5 we find Qx =90 kN (which is below the creep load), i.e. qx = 0.144 MPa.
The settlement is determined according to Eq. ( 151 ), p. 146. We have the shape coefficients (1=2
and := 1.10 and the rheological coefficients ad = a J; = 1/3. The pressuremeter moduli to be applied in
the analysis are determined according to Eqs. (152153). We find = 4.7 MPa and Eprd = 4/[ 1/4.74
+ 1/(0.854.74) + 1/4.39 + 2/(2.57.15)] = 5.0 MPa. Thus, the settlement is given by the relation:
8. PILED RAFTS
Piled rafts (Fig. 163) are used instead of piled footings in poor soil conditions, particularly
w h e r e the subsoil consists of soft, normally consolidated clay. T h e traditional approach
in this case is the s a m e as for piled footings the piles h a v e been designed to carry the
Deep foundations 231
Fig. 164. Settlement contours in mm for two adjacent residential buildings in Gothenburg. Equal soil
characteristics (normally consolidated, highly plastic clay to great depth) and equal building loads (
2
60 kN/m ). Top: Traditional foundation design (factor of safety against pile failure equal to 3). Centre:
Raft foundation with settlement reducing creep piles. Bottom: Average settlement vs. time for the two
buildings, (cf. Hansbo, 1984, and Jendeby, 1986).
w h o l e load with a certain factor of safety against failure. A design principle, similar to
that applied to piled footings, has been used in S w e d e n since long ago with great success
(Hansbo & Kllstrm, 1983; H a n s b o , 1984; Jendeby, 1986; Svensson, 1 9 9 1 ; Randolph,
1993).
T h e approach, suitable for piled rafts on normally or lightly overconsolidated clays,
is as follows:
232 Deep foundations
determine the effective overburden pressure and the preconsolidation pressure a ' c
at different depths in the clay,
determine the decrease in overburden pressure due to excavation and the increase
caused by the construction of the building,
decide h o w m u c h of the building load can be carried by contact stresses at the soil/
raft interface without exceeding the preconsolidation pressure in the soil,
the remainder of the building load shall b e carried by piles in a state of creep failure
(pile load equal to creep load); the piles should be distributed in such a way that the
preconsolidation pressure is nowhere exceeded and so that the differential settlement is
minimised.
Besides the savings in foundation costs, this approach has the advantage that the pile
forces acting against the raft from below are k n o w n in size. C o m p u t e r p r o g r a m m e s have
been developed for the design of the raft, taking into consideration the stiffening effect
of internal walls in the b a s e m e n t (Svensson, 1991).
An e x a m p l e of the settlement distribution for two adjacent residential buildings, one
of which is designed according to the 'creep pile' approach, the other according to the
traditional approach, is given in Fig. 164.
9. DOWNDRAG
ca  0.6c t t (266)
Negative skin friction affects the individual piles only d o w n to the neutral point, w h e r e
the relative m o v e m e n t between pile and soil in the pile/soil interface is zero. B e l o w the
neutral point, the skin friction is positive. The position of the neutral point d e p e n d s on
the length of the piles and the bearing stratum at the pile point. For piles driven through
deep layers of soft clay to bedrock of high bearing capacity, it can be a s s u m e d that the
whole pile is subjected to negative skin friction. However, for piles driven into a sand or
gravel or to bedrock with an ultimate bearing capacity less than that of the pile section,
the position of the neutral point can be taken at the level w h e r e the settlement of the
surrounding soil is 5 m m (Norwegian Pile C o m m i s s i o n , 1973).
For pile groups with large pile spacing, each individual pile can be a s s u m e d to be
subjected to negative skin friction according to Eqs. ( 2 6 5  2 6 6 ) . At small pile spacing, the
d o w n  d r a g forces on the pile group can be assumed to comprise the weight of the fill
above the pile group plus the shear resistance of the soil on the perimeter area of the pile
group d o w n to the neutral point. In consequence, the d o w n  d r a g will be larger for the
peripheral piles than for the central piles.
Fig. 165. Secant pile wall prepared for intermediate floor slab. By courtesy of Bachy.
bored piles that intersect to form a solid wall, resembling the d i a p h r a g m wall, and walls
consisting of piles with interspace w h e r e the soil is retained by arching (Figs. 1 6 5  1 6 7 ) .
T h e construction of piers is carried out in very m u c h the s a m e w a y as of largediameter
bored piles. A hole is excavated or drilled into the soil d o w n to the foundation level and
the pier is built inside. T h e sides of the hole usually have to be stabilised, for instance by
m e a n s of bentonite slurry or sheet pile walls. Another m e t h o d for construction of a pier
is the use of caissons, generally provided with a cutting edge to facilitate the caissons
being lowered to the depth of foundation.
T h e analysis of the bearing capacity of piers, caissons and underground walls can b e
carried out in the same w a y as for piles with due consideration to shape and depth/width
relations. T h e main contribution to the bearing capacity is obtained from base resistance
(cf. Brandl, 1993). In the case of granular soils, the most reliable m e t h o d of analysis seems
to b e the one based upon the results of pressuremeter tests. Calculations based on the
shear strength parameters c ' a n d (//of granular soils are carried out on the assumption of
Fig. 166. Secant wall with unreinforced 'female' piles and intersecting, reinforced 'male' piles.
Fig. 167. Assumed zone of failure for a deep wall foundation. Two cases may occur: the failure zone
does not reach the ground surface (left) and the failure zone intersects the ground surface (right).
'global' failure which does not usually agree with reality. For the sake of completeness,
this type of analysis will all the same be included.
(i) Geostatical method. In the case of cohesionless soil, it m a y be difficult to define the
failure load as the load/settlement curve is generally quite flat r e m i n d i n g of that obtained
for strain hardening soil. This has its explanation in local shear failure taking place before
total failure of the foundation. O n e w a y of taking this into consideration is to apply a
reduced value of the shear strength of the soil or to define failure in relation to a certain
relative settlement sib, w h e r e b is the width of the foundation. A c o m m o n assumption is
that failure takes place at sib = 0.10.
T h e analysis of the bearing capacity of piers and underground walls can be carried out
in principally the s a m e way as for shallow foundations, see p. 126. Let us first consider
the contribution to the bearing capacity represented by the bearing capacity factors Nq and
Nc. A s s u m i n g that w e h a v e a case of ' g l o b a l ' shear failure, comprising a combined
PrandtlRankine failure zone, t w o cases m a y occur: (1) the failure z o n e reaches the
ground surface, (2) the failure zone does not reach the ground surface (Fig. 167).
Assuming that the failure zone reaches the ground surface as shown to the right in Fig.
236 Deep foundations
167 and that w e h a v e a case of plain strain condition (strip foundation), the solution to
the p r o b l e m can b e derived as follows.
In the soil w e d g e A C D , the relative lengths A C / C D / D A , according to the law of sines,
can b e expressed as COS(t] + ^'. Equilibrium projections in the r 0 and ' 0
directions yield:
T5cos0'= [cos(r+</Ocosj  sin?] sin(rj+0O + (fx [COS(t] + ^  sin?7 C O S ( t j + ")
/ = =
aoCos0  Ti [cos(77+0Osinr] + sinrcos(7j+0O + <fx [cos(rj + 0Ocos77sin7]sin(7] + ")
COS0
7
c + \ tan , , ,./m
= cfx    [sin(2i] 4 ')  sin '] (268)
cos '
By this equation system, and can be determined for any given value of cf0, r 0 and '.
Consider section A D as an equivalent free surface. A s s u m i n g further that r represents
the part of the shear strength m a d e use of, w e have:
, / 2 6 9
to = r ( c + CTotan0O ( )
T h e equilibrium condition for the R a n k i n e failure zone below the base of the wall
(wedge A B E ) yields:
Substituting Eq. (268) for ' 0 and Eq. (270) for r 2 and expressing the bearing capacity
under the conventional form:
q^ibllWNy+NyG'v + c'N,
/ /
_ (1 + s i n 0 ) e x p ( 2 0 t a n 0 )
9 ) ( 2 7 2
" l  s i n 0 ' sin(2rj+0')
Deep foundations 237
1000
J3 = 90
/3 = 60
// /
V
/ /3 = 30
100 //
V
A //
/
Y // ////
VA j
10 /
//','///
//
<///.
V r = 0
 r=1
1
10 20 30 40
Angle o f internal friction '
yVc = ( i V ,  l ) c o t f (273)
cos(277
v 1
+ 0 ) tan<*
r = {1 [sin(27] + 0  sin ']} (274)
COS0' COS0'
This yields 77 = / 4 + 0 7 2 for r = 0 and 77 = 0 for r = 1.
The ^ values according to Eq. (272) for r = 0 and 1 and for = 30, 60 and 90 are
given in Fig. 168.
In case the failure zone does not reach the ground surface, ' 0 is replaced by o's. The
earth pressure coefficient against the sides of the foundation, Ks = O'JG'V , can be assumed
to vary between active earth pressure and unity. The ' value should be chosen as an
average along the boundary between the failure zone and the sides of the foundation with
a maximum value governed by the critical depth according to Fig. 135 where the ratio dcr IDp
is replaced by dcrlb.
238 Deep foundations
= 90
0 10 20 30 40
Angle of internal friction </>'
In the analysis of the bearing capacity factor 7Vr it is assumed that the failure zone has
a shape similar to the one prevailing in the former case treated above. T h e m i n i m u m
values of A^are found by trial and error. T h e R v a l u e s , according to Meyerhof (1951),
are given for = 30, 60 and 90 in Fig. 169.
For values of djb > 5, local shear failure seems to govern the b a s e bearing resistance.
M e y e r h o f (1951) r e c o m m e n d s in this case that the shear strength of the soil be reduced
to 8 5 % of the value determined.This is s o m e w h a t higher than 2/3 of the value which was
suggested by Terzaghi (1943).
TABLE 32
Shape factors based on Meyerhof s proposal.
30 >1 1.0
35 1 1.2
>5 1.0
40 1 1.9
2 1.5
5 1.3
> 10 1.0
Deep foundations 239
^ 0 = 1 (275)
2
Afo = 1 + 3 / 2 + 2/J + /  r  arccos r (276)
sc=\+0A5b/l (277)
Example 36: Determine the bearing capacity of a diaphragm wall with a thickness of 0.5 m, founded
at 10 m depth in a homogeneous sand layer with an internal angle of friction of 35. The groundwater
3 3
level is at 2 m depth. The effective density of the soil is 1.8 t/m above and 1.1 t/m below the groundwater
level.
Solution: First find out whether or not the zone of failure reaches the ground surface. With the notations
given in Fig. 167 we have AB = 0.25/cos(45 + 35/2) = 0.54 m. The radius vector of the logarithmic
spiral, representing the Prandtl failure zone, if extended to the sides of the diaphragm wall, is equal to
0.54exp{7U[(180 + 45  3572)/180]tan35}  6.8 m < 10 m. Thus the bearing capacity factors are
governed by = 90.
Since djb > 5, the angle of internal soil friction to be applied in the determination of Nq and ^ s h o u l d
be reduced to 0 ' = arctan(0.85tan35) 31. According to Figs. 168169 this yields Nq ~ 140 and
~ 160. Since = 90, we have cr^ = <fs. The magnitude of <fs is uncertain and has to be estimated. In
our case we assume Ks = 0.5. The & s value is taken as the average along the sides of the wall inside the
failure zone, i.e. from the base of the wall to a height of 6.8 m above the base.The critical depth ratio
for '= 31 according to Fig. 135 is about 10 which yields dcr = 5 m. The maximum value of ' to be
applied is thus 218 + 311 = 69 kPa. At 6.8 m above the base we have ' = 2 18 + 1.2 11  49 kPa.
The bearing capacity becomes:
3
^=0.2511.160+ 1400.5[(49+ 69) 1.8/2 + 695)/6.8]10  5.1 MPa
240 Deep foundations
TABLE 33.
Maximum values for strip foundations and corresponding, minimum embedment ratios. (Baguelin
et ai, 1978)
Rock 1 1 1.9
2 1 2.2
5 1 2.6
10 7 3.0
7
Na = (1 + 0.2y ){5.14 +  A s  iV } (278)
/ 3 b b
(ii) The pressuremeter method. T h e bearing capacity of piers and u n d e r g r o u n d walls can
be estimated on the basis the net limit pressure determined by m e a n s of pressuremeter
tests in a c c o r d a n c e with Eq.(209). T h e values for strip foundations increase from 0.8
for the e m b e d m e n t ratio dlb = 0 to the m a x i m u m values presented in Table 3 3 .
For values of dlb less than the m i n i m u m values (d/b)min required to reach the m a x i m u m
values Kmax, according to Table 3 3 , the values can b e obtained b y the relation:
jfO^ + i ^  o W  ^  (279)
Deep foundations 241
Example 37: Determine, by the pressuremeter method, the bearing capacity of a diaphragm wall, 0.8
m in thickness, with its base at 5 m depth in a sand deposit. The pressure limits pt in the sand, observed
at depth intervals of 1 m, are 2 . 5 , 2 . 1 , 1 . 9 , 2 . 2 , 1 . 8 , and 2.3 MPa, starting from 1 m depth below ground
surface downwards. The groundwater level is at 2 m depth and the porosity of the sand = 27%.
Solution: The density of the sand below and above groundwater is obtained by Eq. (5). Assuming Sr
3 3
= 100% below groundwater and pg = 2.65 t/m we obtain = 2.65(1  0.27) + 0.271.0 = 2.2 t/m ,
3
and assuming Sr = 0 above groundwater we find = 2.65(1  0.27) = 1.9 t/m . The effective overburden
pressure at the foundation level is then ' = 9.81(21.9 + 31.2) 73 kPa.
1 /3
The equivalent limit pressure with regard to end bearing capacity is ple = (2.21.82.3) = 2.1 MPa
from which the net limit pressure pte ~ 2.0 MPa.
1 /2
For dlb = 5/0.8 = 6.25 and (d/b)min = 9 we find = 0.8 + (3.1  0 . 8 ) ( 6 . 2 5 / 9 ) = 2.7.
The pressure limit with regard to shaft resistance can be taken as the average of the observations down
to 5 m depth, Le. pt pt = (2.5 +2.1 +1.9 +2.2 +1.8)/5 = 2.1 MPa
The shaft resistance, taken from Fig. 138, is t h e n / ^ ~ 40 kPa
The bearing capacity is now obtained from Eq. (211). We find:
qf= 0.073 + 2.72 + 250.04/0.8 = 6.0 MPa
10.3 S e t t l e m e n t
Example 38: Determine the settlement of the diaphragm wall described in Example 37 for a wall load
of 1.5 MN/m. The pressuremeter moduli Epn at depth intervals of 1 m, are 20, 25, 24, 30, 35, 34 and
40 MPa, counted from the foundation level downwards.
Solution: The pressuremeter moduli in the different part layers (see p. 147) are Ex = 20 MPa, E2 = 22.2
MPa, 3 = 24.5 MPa, 4 = 26.7 MPa and E5 = 34.4 MPa. These values yield Epri = Ex = 20 MPa and
Eprd = 4 / [ l / 2 0 + 1/(0.8522.2) + 1/24.5 + 1/(226.7) + 1/(234.4)] = 22.6 MPa. The shape factors
according to Table 22 are Xd = 2.65 and = 1.50, and the rheological coefficients according to Table
21 ad = ax =1/3. The net load at the foundation level is 1.5  0 . 0 7 3 0 . 8 = 1.44 MN/m.
The settlement according to Eq. (152), p. 146, is:
= IM 2_0_6 2 , 6 5 , 0 8 m + 1 5018 =
1. INTRODUCTION
(i) Undamped free vibrations. Consider a body with mass m e a r n e d by perfectly elastic
springs with a spring constant equal to k (Fig. 170). In a state of rest the shortening of the
springs required to balance the body is <50. We thus have:
Dynamically loaded foundations 243
Amplitude
Fig. 170. Undamped free vibrations with one degree of freedom can be illustrated by a body resting on
a perfectly elastic spring system. The vibration becomes a sinusoidal function of time.
0 = mglk (280)
By pushing the b o d y d o w n w a r d s a distance z 0 from its position of rest and then letting
it free, the b o d y will start swinging around the position of rest. T h e oscillatory motion of
the b o d y thus achieved can be demonstrated graphically as s h o w n in Fig. 170. T h e
velocity of the b o d y is given by the tangent to the zlt curve. Since the spring is perfectly
elastic w e h a v e according to N e w t o n ' s second law:
d\
mg  (mg +kz) = m (281)
that is:
m'z+kz = 0 (282)
fk
z=Zo cos(\/ t) = zo cos(<*v) (283)
Ym
2 im
= = 2 \  (284)
V k
244 Dynamically loaded foundations
mg + kz
mg
Fig. 171. Damped, free vibrations with one degree of freedom can be illustrated by a body resting on
a springdaspot system.
(285)
(ii) Free vibrations with viscous damping. In reality, u n d a m p e d vibrations do not exist.
T h e oscillation amplitude of the b o d y will decrease with time and finally the body will
turn into a position of rest. D a m p i n g counteracts the m o v e m e n t of the body. Assuming
that w e h a v e to do with viscous damping which is directly proportional to the vibration
velocity (Fig. 171), N e w t o n ' s second law of motion takes the form:
T h e solution to this differential equation is of type = exp(Ar). Substituting this into Eq.
(288) w e find:
Dynamically loaded foundations 245
2
2   {c yjc 4mk)
2m
1
Case 1: c > 4mk. ( O v e r d a m p i n g ) .
= i^expUjf) + 5 i e x p ( ^ i ) (289)
2
C a s e 2: c = 4mk. (Critical damping).
Fig. 172. Viscous damping can give rise to three different time dependencies: (a) Overdamping, (b)
Critical damping, (c) Underdamping.
246 Dynamically loaded foundations
z = z 0 ( ^ + l)exp(^) (291)
Zm Zm
=2y/mk
Ccr (292)
~ = conD (293)
Zm
2
Case 3: c < Amk. (Underdamping).
1 2 2 2
A 1 2 = nD y/c c = n{D\y/\D ) (294)
2m
2 2
= [A 3 sm(conty/1  D ) + B3 cos(conty/1 D )] exp(CunDt) (295)
D
= z0[ , w(dt) + c o s ( ) d0 ] (  ) (296)
y 1
2
D
2
w h e r e = ny/lD
Eq. (296) shows that oscillation is continuing with a gradually decreasing amplitude
2
and with a d a m p e d circular frequency (d  cnyl D (Fig. 172c).
kz + mg
whence:
mz + cz = <2 sin(&)0
0
(297)
After a certain period of time w h o s e length depends on the d a m p i n g ratio the vibrating
system will keep p a c e with the vibrations enforced upon it. T h e system is subjected to
continuous, h a r m o n i c vibrations with a phase shift between the oscillating force and
the oscillating system.
T h e simplest w a y of solving the resulting effect upon the system due to the enforced
vibrations is by vectorial studies (Fig. 174). During oscillation, the velocity vector zcois
perpendicular to to the displacement vector and the acceleration vector zo is per
pendicular to the velocity vector. Furthermore, the m a x i m u m amplitude z 0 is reached for
sincot = 1. Consequently, the following relation can be established:
kzo
(
Fig. 174. Vectorial presentation of displacement, speed and acceleration (left) and of forces acting at
maximum amplitude.
248 Dynamically loaded foundations
T h e conditions of equilibrium in the vertical and horizontal directions (Fig. 174, right)
yield:
1
kz0+ Q0cos(p = mzoco (299)
Go
2 2 2
(301)
^(kmco ) + (cco)
ceo
tan  2
(302)
k  m
F r e q u e n c y ratio flfn
Fig. 175. Dynamic factor as a function of the frequency ratio f/fn and the damping ratio D.
Dynamically loaded foundations 249
///>///////////
Fig. 176. Vertical impact. A body with weight mx is dropped from height h against a foundation block
with mass m supported by a spring system.
Now, if o represented a static load (it has to b e realised that the spring constant k which
represents the soil refers to the d y n a m i c r e s p o n s e of the soil even w h e n determining the
(50 value) w e would h a v e the displacement <50 = Q$lk.
T h e ratio of the m a x i m u m amplitude z 0 to the 'static' displacement <50 is defined as the
dynamic factor . Substituting c/2m for and g/50 for con
2
the d y n a m i c factor and the
phase shift can b e expressed as:
= ? = (303)
So yj[ 1  ( I ) ] + (2 I )
2 2
2
2Dco/
n
tan = (304)
\( )
2
2.3 Impact
and the m a s s of the falling weight is m, the impact velocity is  y/2gh . On the as
sumption that that the duration of the i m p u l s e is short in comparison with the period of
vibration of the system, the initial velocity of the b o d y due to the i m p a c t will b e c o m e
equal to (cf Eq. 175, p. 176):
m
v=v t (1 + g) (305)
m +m
2
1 2 1 2 IF
mv = kz = (306)
2 2 2 k
(308)
T h e total load transmitted to the subgrade is the sum of the d y n a m i c and static loads,
that is:
^tot^statO+) (309)
(310)
Example 39: A tilt hammer with a weight mx of 1 t impacts against a concrete block with a base area
2
of 2 by 3 m and a weight m2 of 26 t. The concrete block is resting via a bed of oak timber on a larger
2
concrete block with a base area of 2.5 by 3.5 m and a weight m 3 of 5 0 1 , founded on a 10 m thick layer
3
of sandy gravel with density = 1.9 t/m and, according to seismic investigations, a Rayleigh wave
velocity vR of 375 m/s.
D'i = 1 t
1.8 m
m a
2m3m
2.4 m
m3 = 50t
2.5 m 3.5 m
Dynamically loaded foundations 251
Determine the the maximum contact pressure and the maximum amplitudes for the upper and lower
concrete blocks due to the impact of the tilt hammer if the impact energy is 30 kNm. The oak bed has
2
a thickness of 0.38 m and a modulus of elasticity = 1000 MPa. The base area of the oak bed is 2.3 m
and its coefficient of restitution e = 0.6.
Solution: The calculation is carried out in two steps, firstly with respect to the oak bed and secondly with
respect to the subsoil.
Step 1. The contact pressure between the upper concrete block and the oak bed is:
qx = 9 . 8 1  2 6 / 2 . 3 = 111 kPa
The corresponding deformation of the oak planks is:
3 3
(5 01 = 0 . 3 8  0 . 1 1 1 / 1 0 = 0 . 0 4 0  m
The velocity v 1 of the tilt hammer when it hits the concrete block is found by the relation:
2
mxvx /2 = 30 kNm
whence
2 3 0
' nn< ,
V l =
~
The initial velocity Vj of the upper concrete block thus becomes:
VI= 7 . 7 5 ( 1 + 0 . 6 ) = 0.46m/s
1+26
and hence the dynamic factor :
0 4 6
^ =
=  =22.7
9 8 1 0 0 4 1 0 3
VgSi V  '  '
The corresponding static load and contact pressure:
3
Px = (1 + Qx)m^ = 23.7269.81 = 6.010 kN
ql = 6.0/2.3 = 2.6 MPa
The maximum amplitude of the upper concrete block becomes:
3 3
z m ax = 22.70.0410 = 0.910 m
Step 2. The contact pressure due to weight ra3 of the lower concrete block is:
509.81
q\i
H
= = 56 kPa
2.53.5
From the result of the seismic investigation we find the dynamic shear modulus:
2 3
G 0 = 1.151.9375 = 307.310 kPa
Assuming that Poisson's ratio of the soil is 0.3, we have
6
0 = 0.8010 kPa
From Eq. (146) and Fig. 100c, yielding Te = 0.75, we find:
6 3
= 0.75562.5/(0.810 ) = 0.1310~ m
Moreover:
62
vu = vi (1 + 0 . 6 ) = 0 . 2 5 m / s
26 + 50
Thus, the dynamic factor becomes:
025
= , 7.0
V 9 . 8  0 . 1 3  ICH
Equivalent static load on the subsoil is:
m m
* n = S ( 2 + 3 ) + % S " * 3 = 9.8176 +79.8150 =4179 kN
from which the corresponding equivalent contact pressure becomes 0.48 MPa.
The maximum amplitude of the lower concrete block becomes:
3 3
W = 7 . 0 0 . 1 3  1 0  = 0.9" m
252 Dynamically loaded foundations
Fig. 177. General modes of vibration with six degrees of freedom. Translation movement designated
as , etc., rotational movement with ^, ^ etc.
3.1 Introduction
T h e linear vibration theory which is applicable for vibrating systems with one degree of
freedom is sufficient for the solution of m a n y vibration p r o b l e m s . However, vibrating
machines often give rise to nonlinear vibrations. Considering the general case, the
vibrating b o d y has six degrees of freedom: displacements in the directions of the three
coordinate axes and rotation around each one of the three axes (Fig. 177). T h e vibrations
m a y include every kind of combination of these motions.
A socalled rocking and sliding m o d e of oscillation represents a type of nonlinear
vibrations w h i c h is c o m m o n l y occurring and, therefore, quite important for dynamically
loaded m a c h i n e foundations. Torsional oscillations represent another type of nonlinear
vibrations that is also c o m m o n .
In the case of m a c h i n e foundations, the horizontal, principal elastic axis does not go
through the centre of gravity of the foundation block but normally through the contact
surface b e t w e e n the foundation and the subsoil. A horizontal, d y n a m i c force gives rise
to a horizontal translation of the foundation b l o c k only if it is applied at the elastic centre
(the intersection point between the horizontal and vertical principal axes) of the
foundation (Fig. 178) and has the s a m e direction as the horizontal principal axis. A
rotational m o m e n t acting in the plane formed b y the vertical and horizontal principal axes
only causes rotation around O. In practice, a horizontal force acting on the foundation
s e l d o m passes through the elastic centre and therefore the vibrations induced are
neither purely horizontal, nor purely rotational. Instead t w o rotational vibrations will take
place around t w o fixed points situated on the vertical principal axis. This t y p e of
vibrations is defined as rockingsliding.
Dynamically loaded foundations 253
Fig. 178. Foundation block subjected to a horizontal, dynamic load outside of its elastic centre.
Let us a s s u m e that point (Fig. 178) represents one of these fixed points and that the
foundation block is turned at the angle y/from its position of rest. T h e centre of gravity
of the foundation C is then displaced a distance = by. In order to induce this m o v e m e n t
of the foundation, it has to b e subjected to a turning m o m e n t around and a horizontal
force through O. T h e m o m e n t and the horizontal force in combination can be replaced
by a horizontal force through point A at a distance from the centre of gravity.
Introducing = \/kx and y/y = l/k^ (Fig. 179) w e have:
whence:
2
+s+s = ob + bs (313)
Fig. 180. Forces belonging to poles A and in connection with rocking movement. The radius of inertia
/ is the geometrical mean of the distances a{ and a2.
m'S+ko = 0 (314)
+=0 (315)
where lis the mass moment of inertia of the foundation with respect to the horizontal axis
of gravity perpendicular to the plane of the figure.
112
But = /b and = k. Hence, Ilm = ab. Introducing the radius of inertia / = (Ilm) , we
find:
2
ab = i (316)
Thus, the radius of inertia iis the geometric mean of the distances a and b. Consequently,
if the distance / is set off from the centre of gravity C and if its end point is connected
with the fixed points A and B, then the angle AEB will be 90 (Fig. 180).
Substituting for b the radius of inertia according to Eq.(316), a can be solved from the
2nd degree equation:
2 , 1 , ^ , 2 .2, .2 riM\
a +  ( + s ) (J1/)
s
whence:
a n = a0 y/afi + i
2
(318)
Dynamically loaded foundations 255
Fig. 181. Principle for dividing up an arbitrary force into components acting in the directions of the three
principal modes of vibration.
1
x 2 2
where 0  ( + s  i ) .
2s y/y
m i =  ^ (319)
ax +a2
m2 = (320)
ax +a2
These mass 'points' are dynamically equivalent to the total mass of the foundation, i.e.
the resulting horizontal movement can be obtained by studying the horizontal movements
of the two mass points. If, for example, mass point mx is subjected to a horizontal impact,
the mass point m2in its capacity as centre of rotation remains at rest, and vice versa.
The corresponding natural frequencies are:
(321)
256 Dynamically loaded foundations
fa = J = ( 3 2 2 )
2y/2
where and 2 represent the horizontal displacements (in m) of the mass points mx and
m2 due to horizontal loads of magnitude gml and g m 2 , acting at the respective mass point.
The two displacement values and 2 are calculated on the basis of and in the
following way: the horizontal force gm x is replaced by a horizontal force gm x, acti ng through
the centre of gravity C, and a turning moment gmx(a + s). The displacement of mass point
mx the becomes equal to:
2
82^gm2[x + (a2s) yy (324)
Px = QXQ0 and P2 = 2Q ( 3 2 5 )
2 2
f2 n
where , = / , and
1 l
r )  f / I
\fn\ ' Vn2f \
Impact:
gmx  ! m j (326)
7
P2 = v2m2y/J7o 2 ( 3 2 7 )
Now, by the aid of equivalent static forces, w e can easily solve the problems caused by
dynamic forces acting in arbitrary directions on the foundation. For example, the
dynamic force R (Fig. 181) can be divided up into three components, one vertical V and
two horizontal Hx and H2. Each component is then studied separately. It has to be noticed
that the dynamic factor will differ between the three components.
Dynamically loaded foundations 257
To be able to study study the influence of any type of d y n a m i c forces, there remains to
analyse the influence of a torsional m o m e n t acting around the vertical axis through the
centre of gravity. A s this axis represents o n e of the three principal axes, w e simply h a v e
to do with p u r e torsional vibrations. In this case, N e w t o n ' s law of motion yields:
'+^ = 0 (328)
Mt = QtM (330)
2
f
fnt
w h e r e Qt =
5  /
4. T H E SUBSOIL AS D A M P E D SPRING S Y S T E M
In the elementary vibration theory it w a s p r e s u m e d that the m a s s of the spring system was
negligible. In reality, the subsoil affected by the oscillating b o d y has a considerable mass
which seemingly w o u l d invalidate a direct application of the results of the massless
spring response. Test experience, however, gives full e v i d e n c e that the elementary
vibration theory can b e applied provided that the subsoil is treated both as a massless
spring system and a d a m p e r with the d a m p i n g ratio D.
In Fig. 182, typical rheological m o d e l s are presented w h i c h are utilised for the analysis
of foundations subjected to vertical, horizontal and torsional d y n a m i c loads
Rigid block
with equivalent mass
Section
f//  ///
5
Rigid block with equivalent mass and
Section mass moment of inertia around horizontal axis
JAW
Fig. 182. Examples of rheological models used for the analysis of dynamically loaded foundations
<50 under the w e i g h t mg of the foundation with regard to the a m p l i t u d e in question. Since
the vibration amplitudes are generally small, <50 can b e calculated on the basis of the
theory of elasticity with a m o d u l u s of elasticity determined by d y n a m i c m e t h o d s , for
e x a m p l e from the results of Rayleigh w a v e or shear w a v e velocity m e a s u r e m e n t s . T h u s ,
in the case of a shallow foundation with rectangular b o t t o m area, <50 can b e determined
according to Eq. (147) by substituting for EQ = 2 G 0 ( 1 + v) and q for mg which yields:
8 0 )
0= (3313
2 G 0( 1 + ) /
1 1 1 I 1 1
' M l '
/
/
1
X
/
Ui
C3 b
CU
1 1 1 1 _ I L_ __L
0.1 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 2 4 6 8 10
Length to width ratio lib
According to Eq. (280), the spring constant can n o w b e expressed by the relation:
kz = mg/<5b (332)
(333)
1
I I I I I I I I I I I I I
Fig. 184. Influence of embedment upon the vertical spring constant for a circular foundation with radius
R (After Kaldjian, 1969). Top curve represents rigid foundation, bottom curve weak foundation.
Horizontal forces in the y direction that are not acting through the elastic centre of the
foundation (which, therefore, give rise to a rocking m o d e of vibration around the y axis)
produce a triangular stress distribution under the bottom area of the foundation.
According to Rausch (1959), this stress distribution can be replaced by a uniform
pressure as shown in Fig. 185. For rocking m o d e of formation, the spring constant k^ can
be chosen according to GorbunovPossadov & Serebrajanyi (1961):
Fig. 185. Theoretical stress distribution due to rocking mode of vibration. However, in practice only one half
of the foundation will be loaded in turns. Replacement distribution suggested by Rausch (1959).
Dynamically loaded foundations 261
vyAl (335)
1
(336)
T h e spring constant for a shallow circular foundation can be chosen according to Reissner
& Sagoci (1944) from the relation:
(337)
(i) Internal damping. T h e internal d a m p i n g ratio D is defined as the ratio of energy loss
to m a x i m u m stored energy in a stress/strain cycle according to the relation (Fig. 186):
1 A
D = (338)
4 As
262 Dynamically loaded foundations
(ii) Geometrical damping. The geometrical damping ratio of a circular rigid foundation
placed on a semiinfinite elastic medium is presented in Table 35. Rectangular foundations
with side lengths / (in the plane of rocking) and b, can be converted to circular foundations
with an equivalent radius Re. For the different modes of vibration the equivalent radius
can be put equal to:
112
Translation: Re = (/)
2 1 /4
Rocking: Re = [ / / ( 3 ) ]
2 2 1/4
Torsional: Re = [A(l + b )/(6n)]
The contact stresses under the foundation base caused by the design load must not
exceed the allowable stresses.
Determine the maximum amplitudes obtained under the influence of the static load
o
263
Dynamically loaded foundations
TABLE 34.
Internal damping ratio for different soils
0.4
03
00
G
C3
0
4 3 2 1
    1 10
Fig. 186. The damping ratio D can be obtained the basis of the r/yhysteresis curve (left) and increases
strongly with increasing /amplitude.
TABLE 35.
Geometrical damping ratio D for various modes of vibration.
Vertical * z  ^ ^ ^ ^
0.288
78v m =
Horizontal ~ 32{1)PR* y[x
8 ~ ~ pR* d+B^y/B
h
_ 0 . 5 0
Torsion = ~ c
264 Dynamically loaded foundations
Example 40: A rotating mass oscillator is placed on a rectangular block foundation with a rectangular
base area 2 by 3 m. The total weight of the mass oscillator and the foundation is 251. The rotating masses,
0.5 t each, have a lever arm of 0.6 m and produce a vertical oscillation with a frequency of 10 Hz. The
foundation is placed with an embedment of 1 m on a 10 m thick sand layer on bedrock. Seismic refraction
measurements have given a Rayleigh wave velocity in the sand equal to 210 m/s. The total density of the
3 3
sand above the groundwater level (at 2 m depth) is 1.8 t/m and below the groundwater level 2.1 t/m .
500 kg / = 1 0 Hz
3 in 2 m J
3
Sand with = 1 . 8 t / m
Solution:
Subsoil condition:
The initial (dynamic) shear modulus G 0 of the sand is calculated from the R wave velocity. Assuming
that the average value of the density is 2 t/m3 we have (see Eq. 59):
2 3
G 0 = \5 = 1.15 2 . 0 2 1 0 = 101 1 0 kPa
whence, assuming Poisson's ratio = 0.3, E0 = 2(1 + v ) G 0 = 263 MPa
Natural frequency:
The effective foundation contact pressure is (mg)/A = (25/6  1.8)g = 23 kPa
The conditionofrest displacement 0 is found by Eq. (146) and Fig. 100c:
2
5o = ^ = 0 . 8 0 4 ^  = 0.14.10 m
AE0 263
whence
1
fn = = 42 Hz.
A = ^ = 0 . 4 7 .
B7
Internal damping ratio can be assumed equal to 0.03, whence total damping ratio:
D
z,tot = 047 + 0.03 = 0.50.
The dynamic factor:
1
= = 1.03
/ 2
[ 1  ( 1 0 / 4 2 ) 2 ] 2 + (20.50 10/42)
Dynamically loaded foundations 265
Example 41: A machine foundation of concrete with a base area of 8 m by 3 m and a height of 3 m is
affected by two oscillating masses, 10 t each. The oscillations take place without phase shift in the
horizontal plane, 3.8 m above the base area, with a circular frequency of 60 cycles/s and a maximum
centrifugal force of 25 kN. The foundation is resting on deep layers of sand with a total density of 1.9
2
t/m and a R wave velocity of 250 m/s. Calculate the maximum foundation pressure and the amplitude
at point D in the xlz plane.
' 50sin)f k N
VU
25cos)/kN 25cosft)/kN
7
/// = /v^///
S a n d w i t h = 1 . 9 t/iiv^
Solution:
Oscillating force:
F r e q u e n c y / = 2 = 60/2 = 9.55 Hz
Maximum force amplitude 2Q0 = 50 kN
Subsoil:
The dynamic shear modulus of the sand is obtained from the shear wave velocity:
2 3
G 0 = 1.151.9250 = 137 1(> kPa
whence, for = 0.3, E0 = 355 MPa
Foundation block:
Mass: m =8332.4 = 173 t
Centre of gravity:
5(173 + 2 0 ) = 1731.5 + 203.8
s = 1.74 m
Mass moment of inertia (r designates the polar distance of an infinitesimal mass dm from the centre
of gravity):
2
/ = jV dm
For rocking in the xlz plane we have to calculate the mass moment of inertia
2 2
Iy = l(x + z )dm = Iyx+Iyz
We have :
2 2
Iyx= 1738 /12 = 923 t m
2 2 2 2
Iyz = 173(3 /12 + 0 . 2 4 ) +20(1.26 + 0 . 8 ) = 225 t m
whence:
2
Iy = 923 + 225 = 1148 t m
The radius of inertia / = / I l m for the total mass 193 t becomes:
iy = 2.44 m
266 Dynamically loaded foundations
Spring constants:
The maximum displacement amplitude is obtained when the maximum force amplitude is directed
perpendicular to the longer side of the foundation, i.e. in the y direction.
Remains to determine and .
For determination of we have to know kx. According to Eq. (336) we have kx = </ . For
the side ratio lib = 8/3 (Fig. 183), = 1.0 whence kx = 355/S^3  1740 M N / m . For determination
of y/y we have to know k^. According to Eq. (335) we have k^ = [GQ/(1  v^yyAL For the side ratio
8/3 (Fig. 183), = 0.65, whence k^ = 1360.65248/0.7  24250 MNm/rad.
3 6
Thus, = Ukx = 0.575 1 0  rn/MN and = Ukw = 41.2 1 0  rad/MNm.
Rotational centres of rocking movement:
Now, ax 2 can be calculated according to Eq. (318). First we calculate a0.
2 2 2 2
a0 = +s L ) = ^ ( + 1 . 7 4  2 . 4 4 ) = 3.17 m
2s 2 1.74^41.2
whence
2 2
a h2 = 3.17/3.17 +2.44
Thus, the two rotational centres of the rocking movement (poles 1 and 2) are defined by ax = 0.83 m
and \a2 I = 7.17 m.
Pole displacements:
The pole displacements ( of the upper pole 1 and 2 of the lower pole 2) are given by Eqs. (323
324 ):
3 3 6 3
{ =9.81193(7.17/8.0)10 [0.57510 + (0.83 + 1.74)^41.210 ] = 1.44 10" m
3 3 2 6 3
2 = 9.81 193(0.83/8.0) 10 [0.574 f (1.74  7.17) 41.2 1 0 ] = 0 . 3 5  1 0 m
Natural frequencies:
3 1
fi = ( 2 / 1 . 4 4 1 0  ) " = 13 H z
3 1
fn2 = ( 2 / 0 . 3 5 " ) = 27 H z
Total damping:
Geometrical damping:
3 7 1 4 8
Bw = 5
=  !2 45 /4= 0.272
V
8 pRe 8 1.9 (24 8 / 3 )
whence:
Q , 1
Vy = i =0.23
1.272/0.272
Internal damping can be assumed equal to = 0.03.
Total damping: D = 0.26
Dynamic factors:
1
i = = 1.7
2 2 2
/[1(9.55/13) ] + (20.269.55/13)
1
2 = ^ 2 2
= =2 1 . 1
/ [ 1  ( 9 . 5 5 / 2 7 ) ] + (2 0.26 9 . 5 5 / 2 7 )
Equivalent external force system:
The external force system = 2)0 and M of around the elastic centre is replaced by an
equivalent force system distributed between poles 1 and 2. We find:
P = P{+P2
M = Pl(al+s)P2(a2s)
whence:
Dynamically loaded foundations 267
D M + P{g2s)
M = 7
\ + a2
P(ai+s)M
r2 =
a\ +a2
We have = 1.750 = 85 kN,
M= 1.7503.8 = 323 kNm,
ax = 0.83 m; a2 = 7.17 m and s = 1.74 m.
Introducing these values, w e find:
= 9 8 kN
P2 =  13 kN
The moment around the elastic centre produced by Px: Mx = 98(0.83 + 1.74) = 252 kNm
Maximum contact stresses:
193# 3252
a m ax = +
2
= 103 kPa
83 3 8 /6
W = 3  8 5 / 2 4 = 11 kPa
Maximum amplitude at point D:
In direction:
Mx I 252l(h3. 8
zD = = = 0 . 0 4  10 m
kyyl 242502
In the direction:
Pi Mxh 85103 252103.3
3
xD = + = + = 0.08 10 m
kx = V D + 1740
kyy * D =  ' 24250= 0.09 mm.
z 0 9 1 0 3 m
Total amplitude
268 Retaining structures
RETAINING S T R U C T U R E S
1. I N T R O D U C T I O N
2. E A R T H P R E S S U R E A G A I N S T R E T A I N I N G W A L L S
An extensive analysis of the various failure patterns that can occur depending upon the
m o v e m e n t of a retaining wall has been presented by Brinch H a n s e n (1953), s o m e of
which are presented in Fig. 187. As can b e seen, t w o types of failure patterns exist: one
characterised by the development of two groups of failure surfaces intersecting each
other by the angle 9 0  0 ' ( z o n e failure) and another by the d e v e l o p m e n t of a single failure
surface (line failure). A combination of zone failure and line failure is c o m m o n .
In the design of retaining walls, the p r o b l e m of earth pressure evaluation is generally
simplified to three cases:
earth pressure at rest (no m o v e m e n t between soil and wall),
active earth pressure (the wall is m o v i n g a w a y from the soil until failure takes place),
Retaining structures 269
> 1.26
> 1.21
n= z/h
= ZJh
Fig. 187. Examples of different types of failure depending upon the situation of the rotational centre of
the wall and the direction of rotation.
Passive earth pressure (the wall is m o v i n g against the soil until failure takes place).
T h e m e c h a n i c a l b a c k g r o u n d to these three cases will b e elucidated in brief.
Dense state
Earth pressure
Critical density
Critical density
Fig. 188. Influence of wall movement on the development of earth pressure exemplified for dense and
loose cohesionless soil
(ii) Active earth pressure. Now, let us a s s u m e that the retaining wall is m o v i n g from its
position of rest, away from the soil mass. T h e earth pressure is then gradually decreasing
as shown in Fig. 188. For cohesionless soil, two borderline cases m a y occur depending
upon whether or not the soil is in a dense or in a loose state. In the case of dense soil, the
earth pressure, first of all, rapidly reaches a m i n i m u m value, but, by additional m o v e m e n t
of the wall, it increases again until it b e c o m