Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 38

8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations- Bearing Capacity
Prepared by: Engr. Marc Lin F. Abonales

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

INTRODUCTION
The lowest past of a structure is generally referred to as the foundation.
A properly designed foundation is one that transfers the load Its function is to transfer the
throughout the soil without overstressing the soil. load of the structure to the
soil on which it is resting.
Can result in either
Thus, geotechnical and structural
excessive settlement Shallow foundations are
engineers who design or shear failure of
those foundations that have a
foundations must evaluate the the soil, both of
which cause damage depth-of-embedment-to-width
bearing capacity of soils.
to the structure. ratio of approximately less
than four.

To perform satisfactorily, shallow foundations must have two main characteristics:


1. They have to be safe against overall shear failure in the soil that supports them.
2. They cannot undergo excessive displacement, or settlement.

1
8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

INTRODUCTION

TYPES OF
FOUNDATION

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

GENERAL CONCEPTS
Bearing capacity: The capacity of
Three modes of failure:
soil to support the loads applied
to the ground. The bearing
a) General Shear Failure
capacity of soil is the maximum
average contact pressure between Most common type of shear failure;
the foundation and the soil which occurs in strong soils and rocks
should not produce shear failure
in the soil.
b) Local Shear Failure
Ultimate bearing capacity: The Intermediate between general and
load per unit area of the punching shear failure
foundation at which shear failure
in soil occurs. The maximum
c) Punching Shear Failure
bearing capacity of soil at which
the soil fails by shear. Occurs in very loose sands weak
clays

2
8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

GENERAL CONCEPTS
Consider a strip (i.e., theoretically length is
infinity) foundation resting on the surface of a
dense sand or stiff cohesive soil, as shown in the
figure, with a width of B. If load is gradually
applied to the foundation, settlement will
increase. The variation of the load per unit area
on the foundation, q, with the foundation
settlement is also shown in the figure. At a certain
point when the load per unit area equals qu a
sudden failure in the soil supporting the
foundation will take place, and the failure surface
in the soil will extend to the ground surface. This
load per unit area, qu, is usually referred to as the
ultimate bearing capacity of the foundation. When
this type of sudden failure in soil takes place, it is
called general shear failure.

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

GENERAL CONCEPTS
If the foundation under consideration rests on sand or clayey
soil of medium compaction, an increase of load on the
foundation will also be accompanied by an increase of
settlement. However, in this case the failure surface in the
soil will gradually extend outward from the foundation, as
shown by the solid lines in the figure. When the load per unit
area on the foundation equals qu(1), the foundation movement
will be accompanied by sudden jerks. A considerable
movement of the foundation is then required for the failure
surface in soil to extend to the ground surface (as shown in
broken lines in the figure). The load per unit area at which
this happens is the ultimate bearing capacity, qu. Beyond this
point, an increase of load will be accompanied by a large
increase of foundation settlement. The load per unit area of
the foundation, qu(1), is referred to as the first failure load.
Note that a peak value of q is not realized in this type of
failure, which is called local shear failure in soil.

3
8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

GENERAL CONCEPTS
If the foundation is supported by a
fairly loose soil, the load-settlement
plot will be like the one in the figure.
In this case, the failure surface in soil
will not extend to the ground surface.
Beyond the ultimate failure load, qu,
the load-settlement plot will be steep
and practically linear. This type of
failure in soil is called punching shear
failure.

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

GENERAL CONCEPTS

General shear failure results in a Local shear failure results in Punching shear failure occurs
clearly defined plastic yield slip considerable vertical in very loose sands and soft
surface beneath the footing and displacement prior to the clays and there is little or no
spreads out one or both sides, development of noticeable development of planes of
eventually to the ground surface. shear planes. These shear shear failure in the underlying
Failure is sudden and will often planes do not generally extend soil. Slip surfaces are
be accompanied by severe tilting. to the soil surface, but some generally restricted to vertical
Generally associated with adjacent bulging may be planes adjacent to the footing,
heaving. This type of failure observed, but little tilting of the and the soil may be dragged
occurs in dense sand or stiff clay. structure results. This shear down at the surface in this
failure occurs for loose sand region.
and soft clay.

4
8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

GENERAL CONCEPTS
From the curves the different types of shear
failures can be predicted :
For general shear failure there is a
pronounced peak after which load
decreases with increase in settlement. The
load at the peak gives the ultimate stress
or load.
For local shear failure there is no
pronounced peak like general shear failure
and hence the ultimate load is calculated
for a particular settlement.
Load settlement curves for different For punching shear failure the load goes
shear on increasing with increasing settlement
and hence there is no peak resistance.

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

GENERAL CONCEPTS

5
8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity
TERZAGHIS ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY THEORY
Terzaghi (1943) was the first to present a comprehensive theory for evaluating of rough shallow
foundations. According to this theory, a foundation is shallow if the depth, Df, of the foundation is less
than or equal to the width of the foundation. Later investigators, however, have suggested that
foundations with Df equal to 3 to 4 times the width of the foundation may be defined as shallow
foundation.
Terzaghi suggested that for a
continuous, or strip foundation (that is, the
width-to-length ratio of the foundation
approaches 0), the failure surface in soil at
ultimate load may be assumed to be similar to
that shown below (This is the case of general
shear failure). The effect of soil above the
bottom of the foundation may also be assumed
to be replaced by an equivalent surcharge, q =
Df (where: = unit weight of the soil).

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity
TERZAGHIS ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY THEORY
Assumptions for Terzaghi's Method:
Depth of foundation is less than or equal to its width
No sliding occurs between foundation and soil (rough foundation)
Soil beneath foundation is homogeneous semi infinite mass
Mohr-Coulomb model for soil
General shear failure mode is the governing mode (but not the only mode)
No soil consolidation occurs
Foundation is very rigid relative to the soil
Soil above bottom of foundation has no shear strength; is only a surcharge
load against the overturning load
Applied load is compressive and applied vertically to the centroid of the
foundation
No applied moments present

6
8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity
TERZAGHIS ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY THEORY
The failure zone under the foundation
can be separated into three parts:
1. The triangular zone ACD immediately
under the foundation. (Active zone)
2. The radial shear zones ADF and CDE,
with the curves DE and DF being arcs of a
logarithmic spiral. (Transition zone)
3. Two triangular Rankine passive zones
AFH and CEG. (Passive zone)
The angles CAD and ACD are assumed
to be equal to the soil friction angle (that is, =
). Note that, with the replacement of the soil
above the bottom of the foundation by an
equivalent surcharge q, the shear resistance of
the soil along the failure surfaces GI and HJ was
neglected.

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity
TERZAGHIS ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY THEORY

Using the equilibrium analysis, Terzaghi expressed the ultimate bearing capacity in
the form (For foundations that exhibit the general shear failure mode in soils)

= + + (for continuous or strip foundation)

= . + + . (for square foundation)
= . + + . (for circular foundation)
Where:
B = width for square footing
= diameter for circular footing
c' = cohesion of soil
= unit weight of soil
q = Df
Nc, Nq, N = bearing capacity factors that are nondimensional and are only functions of the soil friction angle,

7
8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity
TERZAGHIS ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY THEORY

= + +



= + +

Cohesion Below
term Above foundation
foundation level
level

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity
TERZAGHIS ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY THEORY
The bearing capacity factors Nc, Nq, and N are
defined by:

8
8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity
TERZAGHIS ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY THEORY
For foundations that exhibit the local shear failure mode in soils, Terzaghi suggested the
following modifications:

=


= + + (for continuous or strip foundation)

= . + + . (for square foundation)
= . + + . (for circular foundation)

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity
TERZAGHIS ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY THEORY

Nc, Nq, and N, the modified bearing


capacity factors, can be calculated by
using the bearing capacity factor
equations (for Nc, Nq, and N, respectively)
by replacing

9
8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity
TERZAGHIS ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY THEORY

Terzaghis bearing capacity equations have now been modified to take


into account the effects of the foundation shape (B/L), depth of embedment
(Df) and the load inclination. Many design engineers, however, still use
Terzaghis equation, which provides fairly good results considering the
uncertainty of the soil conditions at various sites.

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

FACTOR OF SAFETY
The net ultimate bearing capacity is defined as the
Calculating the gross allowable load-
ultimate pressure per unit area of the foundation that
bearing capacity of shallow foundations requires can be supported by the soil in excess of the pressure
the application of a factor of safety (FS) to the gross caused by the surrounding soil at the foundation level.
ultimate bearing capacity, or If the difference between the unit weight of concrete

used in the foundation and the unit weight of soil


surrounding is assumed to be negligible, then
=

However, some practicing engineers prefer
to use a factor of safety such that

The factor of safety as defined by the preceding


equation should be at least 3 in all cases.

10
8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

EXAMPLE
PROBLEM 1.

PROBLEM 2.
Based from Problem 1, assume that local shear failure occurs in
the soil.

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

THE GENERAL BEARING CAPACITY EQUATION


The ultimate bearing capacity equations based from Terzaghis equations are for continuous,
square, and circular foundations only; they do not address the case of rectangular foundations (0 < B/L
< 1). Also, The equations do no take into account the shearing resistance along the failure surface in
soil above the bottom of the foundation. In addition, the load on the foundation may be inclined. To
account for all these shortcomings, Meyerhof (1963) suggested the following form of the general
bearing capacity equation:

qu = cNcFcsFcdFci + qNqFqsFqdFqi + BNFsFdFi


Where:
c = cohesion
q = effective stress at the level of the bottom of the foundation
= unit weight of soil
B = width of foundation ( = diameter for a circular foundation)
Fcs, Fqs, Fs = shape factors
Fcd, Fqd, Fd = depth factors
Fci, Fqi, Fi = load inclination factors
Nc, Nq, N = bearing capacity factors

11
8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

THE GENERAL BEARING CAPACITY EQUATION


Bearing Capacity Factors
The equation for Nc was originally derived by
Based on laboratory and field studies of bearing Prandtl (1921), and the relation for Nq was
capacity, the basic nature of the failure surface presented by Reissner (1924). Caquot and Kerisel
in soil suggested by Terzaghi now appears to be (1953) and Vesic (1973) gave the relation for N as
correct (Vesic, 1973). However, the angle
shown in is closer to 45 + /2 than to , as was
originally assumed by Terzaghi. With = 45 +
/2, the relations for Nc and Nq can be derived
as

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

THE GENERAL BEARING CAPACITY EQUATION


Bearing Capacity Factors
The table shows the variation of the
preceding bearing capacity factors with
soil friction angles.

12
8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

THE GENERAL BEARING CAPACITY EQUATION


Shape, Depth, Inclination Factors

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

THE GENERAL BEARING CAPACITY EQUATION


Shape, Depth, Inclination Factors

13
8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

THE GENERAL BEARING CAPACITY EQUATION


Shape, Depth, Inclination Factors

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

EXAMPLE
PROBLEM 3.
Solve problem 1 using the general bearing capacity equation.

PROBLEM 4.
The applied load on a shallow square foundation makes an angle
of 15 with the vertical. Given: B = 6 ft, Df = 3 ft, = 115 lb/ft3, =
25, and c = 500 lb/ft2. Use FS = 4 and determine the gross
allowable load using the general bearing capacity equation.

14
8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity
MODIFICATION OF BEARING CAPACITY EQUATIONS FOR
WATER TABLE
The preceding equations
give the ultimate bearing
capacity, based on the
assumptions that the water table
is located well below the
foundation. However, if the water
table is close to the foundation,
some modifications of the
bearing capacity equations will
be necessary.

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity
MODIFICATION OF BEARING CAPACITY EQUATIONS FOR
WATER TABLE
The preceding equations
give the ultimate bearing
capacity, based on the
assumptions that the water table
is located well below the
foundation. However, if the water
table is close to the foundation,
some modifications of the
bearing capacity equations will
be necessary.

15
8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

EXAMPLE
PROBLEM 5. A column foundation is 3 m x 3 m in plan. Given: Df = 2 m, =
25, c = 70 kPa. If FS = 3, determine the net allowable load the foundation
could carry.
a. Using Terzaghis Bearing Capacity Equation
b. Using General Bearing Capacity Equation

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

EXAMPLE
PROBLEM 6.

Use the Terzaghis Equation and General Bearing Capacity Equation

16
8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

EFFECT OF SOIL COMPRESSIBILITY


Some Terzaghis bearing capacity equations which apply to the case of
general shear failure were modified to Terzaghis bearing capacity equations
in case of local shear failure to take into account the change of failure mode
in soil. The change of failure mode is due to soil compressibility, to account
for which Vesic (1973) proposed the following modifications of the General
Bearing Capacity Equation that was proposed by Meyerhof:

qu = cNcFcsFcdFcc + qNqFqsFqdFqc + BNFsFdFc


Where: Fcc, Fqc, and Fc are soil compressibility factors.
The soil compressibility factors were derived by Vesic (1973) by
analogy to the expansion of cavities.

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

EFFECT OF SOIL COMPRESSIBILITY


According to that theory, in order to calculate Fcc, Fqc, and Fc, the following steps should be taken:

Step 1. Calculate the rigidity index, Ir, of the soil at a depth approximately B/2 below the bottom of the foundation, or

=
+
Where:

Gs = shear modulus of the soil =
(+ )
Es = Modulus of Elasticity
s = Poissons ratio
q = effective overburden pressure at a depth of Df + B/2

Step 2. The critical rigidity index, Ir(cr), can be expressed as


() = . .

The variations of Ir(cr) with B/L are given in the next table.

17
8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

EFFECT OF SOIL COMPRESSIBILITY

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

EFFECT OF SOIL COMPRESSIBILITY


According to that theory, in order to calculate Fcc, Fqc, and Fc, the following steps should be
taken:
Step 3. If Ir Ir(cr), then

Fcc, Fqc, and Fc = 1


However, if Ir < Ir(cr), then

(. )( )
= = . + . +
+
For = 0,

= . + . + .

For > 0,


=

Note: The bearing capacity factors to be used is the same table used in the general bearing capacity
equations.

18
8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

EFFECT OF SOIL COMPRESSIBILITY

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

EXAMPLE
PROBLEM 7. For a shallow foundation, B = 0.6 m, L = 1.2 m, and Df
= 0.6 m. the known soil characteristics are as follows:
Soil:
= 25
c = 48 kPa
= 18 kN/m3
Modulus of Elasticity, Es = 620 kPa
Poissons Ratio, s = 0.3

Calculate the ultimate bearing capacity.

19
8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

ECCENTRICALLY LOADED FOUNDATIONS


In several instances, as with the base of a In such cases, the distribution of pressure
retaining wall, foundations are subjected to moments in by the foundation on the soil is not uniform. The
addition to the vertical load, as shown in the figure. nominal distribution of pressure is

The exact distribution of pressure is difficult to


estimate.

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

ECCENTRICALLY LOADED FOUNDATIONS

The figure (b) shows a force


system equivalent to that shown in
the figure (a).

20
8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

ECCENTRICALLY LOADED FOUNDATIONS


Case 2: e = B/6
The distance, e = M/Q, is the eccentricity. The
nominal distribution of pressure is
Case 1: e < B/6

qmin = 0

Case 3: e > B/6

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

ECCENTRICALLY LOADED FOUNDATIONS


The figure below shows the nature of failure surface in soil for a surface strip foundation subjected to an
eccentric load. The factor of safety for such type of loading against bearing capacity failure can be evaluated as

=

Where: Qult = ultimate load-carrying capacity

21
8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity
ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY UNDER
ECCENTRIC LOADING ONE-WAY ECCENTRICITY
A. Effective Area Method (Meyerhof, 1953) Step 2. Use the general bearing capacity
equation for the ultimate bearing capacity:
In 1953, Meyerhof proposed a theory that is generally referred to
as the effective area method. q'u = cNcFcsFcdFci + qNqFqsFqdFqi + BNFsFdFi
The following is a step-by-step procedure for
determining the ultimate load that the soil can support and the To evaluate Fcs, Fqs, and Fs, use the effective
factor of safety against bearing capacity failure: length and effective width dimensions instead
of L and B, respectively. To determine
Step 1. Determine the effective dimensions of Fcd,Fqd,and Fd, do not replace B with B.
the foundation: Step 3. The total ultimate load that the
B = effective width = B 2e foundation can sustain is
L = effective length = L Qult = qu(B)(L) = qu(A)
Note that if the eccentricity were in the Where: A = effective area
direction of the length of the foundation, the
value of L would be equal to L 2e. The value Step 4. The factor of safety against bearing
of B would equal B. The smaller of the two capacity failure is

dimensions (i.e., L and B) is the effective =
width of the foundation.

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity
ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY UNDER
ECCENTRIC LOADING ONE-WAY ECCENTRICITY
B. Prakash and Saran Theory
Prakash and Saran (1971) also recommended the
Prakash and Saran (1971) analyzed the problem of following for the shape factors:
ultimate bearing capacity of eccentrically and vertically
loaded continuous (strip) foundations by using the one-
sided failure surface in soil. According to this theory, the
Fcs(e) = 1.2 0.025 (with a minimum of 1.0)

ultimate load per unit length of a continuous foundation can Fqs(e) = 1
be estimated as
Fs(e) = . + . + .

Qult = B[cNc(e) + qNq(e) + BN(e)]

Where: Nc(e), Nq(e), N(e) = bearing capacity factors under


eccentric loading.
For rectangular foundations, the ultimate load can
be given as

Qult = BL[cNc(e)Fcs(e) + qNq(e)Fqs(e) + BN(e)Fs(e)]

Where: Fcs(e), Fqs(e), and Fs(e) = shape factors

22
8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity
ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY UNDER
ECCENTRIC LOADING ONE-WAY ECCENTRICITY
The variations of Nc(e), Nq(e) and N(e) with soil friction angle are given in the following figures:

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity
ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY UNDER
ECCENTRIC LOADING ONE-WAY ECCENTRICITY
C. Reduction Factor Method (For Granular Soil) The magnitude of Rk can be expressed as

=
Purkayastha and Char (1977) carried out
stability analysis of eccentrically loaded continuous
foundations (Fqs = 1, Fs = 1) supported by a layer of Where a and k are functions of the embedment ratio Df/B.
sand using the method of slices. Based on that analysis, Hence,
they proposed

() qu(eccentric) = qu(centric) (1 Rk) = qu(centric)
=
() Where
Where: qu(centric) = qNqFqd + BNFd
Rk = reduction factor
qu(eccentric) = ultimate bearing capacity of eccentrically The relationships for Fqd and Fd are the same used in
loaded continuous foundations general bearing capacity equations.
qu(centric) = ultimate bearing capacity of centrally loaded The ultimate load per unit length of the
continuous foundation foundation can then be given as

Qu = Bqu(eccentric)

23
8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity
ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY UNDER
ECCENTRIC LOADING ONE-WAY ECCENTRICITY
C. Reduction Factor Method (For Granular Soil)

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

EXAMPLE
PROBLEM 8. A continuous foundation is shown in the figure
below. If the load eccentricity is 0.2 m, determine the ultimate load,
Qult, per unit length of the foundation. Use:
a. Meyerhofs effective area method
b. Prakash and Saran Theory
c. Reduction Factor Method

24
8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity
ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY UNDER
ECCENTRIC LOADING TWO-WAY ECCENTRICITY
Consider a situation in which a foundation is subjected to a vertical ultimate load Qult and a
moment M, as shown in figures (a) and (b). For this case, the components of the moment M
about the x- and y-axes can be determined as Mx and My, respectively, as shown figure (c).
This condition is equivalent to a load Qult placed eccentrically on the foundation with x = eB
and y = eL, as shown in figure (d).

Analysis of foundation with two-way eccentricity

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity
ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY UNDER
ECCENTRIC LOADING TWO-WAY ECCENTRICITY
Therefore,

= =

If Qult is needed, it can be obtained from


Qult = quA
Where:
qu = cNcFcsFcdFci + qNqFqsFqdFqi + BNFsFdFi

A = effective area = BL

As before, to evaluate Fcs, Fqs, and Fs (the same formulas used in the general bearing
capacity equation), use the effective length L and effective width B instead of L and B,
respectively. To calculate Fcd, Fqd, and Fd (the same formulas used in the general bearing
capacity equation), do not replace B with B.

25
8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity
ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY UNDER
ECCENTRIC LOADING TWO-WAY ECCENTRICITY
In determining the effective area, A, effective width, B, and effective length, L, five possible
cases may arise (Higher and Anders, 1985).
Case I. eL/L 1/6 and eB/B 1/6. The effective area for this
condition is shown in the figure, or
A = B1L1
Where:

= .


= .

The effective length L is the larger of the two
dimensions B1 and L1. So the effective width is

=

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity
ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY UNDER
ECCENTRIC LOADING TWO-WAY ECCENTRICITY
In determining the effective area, A, effective width, B, and effective length, L, five possible
cases may arise (Higher and Anders, 1985).
Case II. eL/L < 0.5 and 0 < eB/B < 1/6. The effective area for
this case, shown in the figure, is

A = (L1 + L2)B

The magnitude of L1 and L2 can be determined from the


next slide. The effective width is


=
( )
The effective length is

L = L1 or L2 (whichever is larger)

26
8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity
ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY UNDER
ECCENTRIC LOADING TWO-WAY ECCENTRICITY

For Case II.

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

For Case II.

27
8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity
ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY UNDER
ECCENTRIC LOADING TWO-WAY ECCENTRICITY
In determining the effective area, A, effective width, B, and effective length, L, five possible
cases may arise (Higher and Anders, 1985).

Case III. eL/L < 1/6 and 0 < eB/B < 0.5. The effective area for
this case, shown in the figure, is

A = (B1 + B2)L

The effective width is


B = A/L
The effective length is
L = L

The magnitudes of B1 and B2 can be determined


from the next slide.

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity
ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY UNDER
ECCENTRIC LOADING TWO-WAY ECCENTRICITY

For Case III.

28
8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity
ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY UNDER
ECCENTRIC LOADING TWO-WAY ECCENTRICITY
In determining the effective area, A, effective width, B, and effective length, L, five possible
cases may arise (Higher and Anders, 1985).
Case IV. eL/L < 1/6 and eB/B < 1/6. The effective area for this
case, shown in the figure, is

A = L2B + (B + B2)(L L2)


The ratio B2/B, and thus B2, can be determined by using the
eL/L curves that slope upward. Similarly, the ratio L2/L, and
thus L2, can be determined by using the eL/L curves that
slope downward. (Refer to the figure found in the next
slide.)
The effective width is
B = A/L
The effective length is
L = L

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity
ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY UNDER
ECCENTRIC LOADING TWO-WAY ECCENTRICITY

For Case IV.

29
8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

For Case IV.

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity
ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY UNDER
ECCENTRIC LOADING TWO-WAY ECCENTRICITY
In determining the effective area, A, effective width, B, and effective length, L, five possible
cases may arise (Higher and Anders, 1985).

Case V. In the case of circular foundations under eccentric


loading, the eccentricity is always one-way. The effective
area, A, and the effective width, B, for a circular
foundation are given in a nondimensional form in the table
found in the next slide. Once A and B are determined, the
effective length can be obtained as

30
8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

For Case V.

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

EXAMPLE
PROBLEM 9. A square
foundation is shown in the figure
with eL = 0.3 m and eB = 0.15 m.
Assume two-way eccentricity,
and determine the ultimate load,
Qult.

31
8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

EXAMPLE
PROBLEM 10. Consider the foundation in problem 9 with the
following changes:
eL = 0.18 m
eB = 0.12 m

For the soil, = 16.5 kN/m3


= 25
c = 25 kPa

Determine the ultimate load, Qult.

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity
BEARING CAPACITY OF A CONTINUOUS FOUNDATION
SUBJECTED TO ECCENTRIC INCLINED LOADING
The problem of ultimate bearing capacity of a continuous foundation subjected to an
eccentric inclined load was studied by Saran and Agarwal (1991). If a continuous foundation
is located at a depth Df below the ground surface and is subjected to an eccentric load (load
eccentricity = e) inclined at an angle to the vertical, the ultimate capacity can be expressed
as


= + +

Where: Nc(ei), Nq(ei), and N(ei) = bearing capacity factors.

The variations of the bearing capacity factors with e/B, , and derived by Saran and
Agarwal are given in figures in the next slides.

32
8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity
BEARING CAPACITY OF A CONTINUOUS FOUNDATION
SUBJECTED TO ECCENTRIC INCLINED LOADING

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity
BEARING CAPACITY OF A CONTINUOUS FOUNDATION
SUBJECTED TO ECCENTRIC INCLINED LOADING

33
8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity
BEARING CAPACITY OF A CONTINUOUS FOUNDATION
SUBJECTED TO ECCENTRIC INCLINED LOADING

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

EXAMPLE
PROBLEM 11. A continuous foundation is shown in the figure.
Estimate the ultimate load, Qult, per unit length of the foundation.

34
8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity
MAT FOUNDATIONS COMMON TYPES
Mat foundations are shallow foundations which
is sometimes referred to as a raft foundation. It is a
combined footing that may cover the entire area under a
structure supporting several columns and walls.
Mat foundations are sometimes preferred for
soils that have low-bearing capacities but that will have to
support high column and/or wall loads. Under some
conditions, spread footings would have to cover more than
half the building area, and mat foundations might be more
economical. Several types of mat foundations are currently
used. Some of the common types are shown schematically
in the figures and include the following:
1. Flat plate (Figure a). The mat is of uniform thickness.
2. Flat plate thickened under columns. (Figure b)
3. Beams and slab (Figure c). The beams run both ways,
and the columns are located at the intersection of the
beams.
4. Flat plates with pedestals (Figure d).
5. Slab with basement walls as a part of the mat (Figure
e). The walls act as stiffeners for the mat.

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity
MAT FOUNDATIONS COMMON TYPES
Mats may be
supported by piles. The piles
help in reducing the
settlement of a structure
built over highly
compressible soil. Where the
water table is high, mats are
often placed over piles to
control buoyancy.
The figure shows the
difference between the depth
Df and the width B of isolated
foundations and mat
foundation. The next figure
shows a mat foundation
under construction.

35
8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity
BEARING CAPACITY OF MAT FOUNDATIONS
The gross ultimate bearing capacity A suitable factor of safety should be used to
of a mat foundation can be determined by the calculate the net allowable bearing capacity:
same equation used for spread footings, or For mats on clay, the factor of safety should not be
less than 3 under dead load and maximum live
qu = cNcFcsFcdFci + qNqFqsFqdFqi + BNFsFdFi
load. However, under the most extreme conditions,
the factor of safety should be at least 1.75 to 2.
The proper values of the bearing For mats constructed over sand, a factor of safety
capacity factors and the shape, depth, and of 3 should normally used.
load inclination factors are the same used in Under most working conditions, the factor of
the general bearing capacity equation. The safety against bearing capacity failure of mats on
term B in the equation is the smallest sand is very large.
dimension of the mat.

The net ultimate bearing capacity is

qnet(u) = qu q

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

EXAMPLE
PROBLEM 12. Determine the net ultimate
bearing capacity of a mat foundation
measuring 12 m x 8 m on a saturated clay
with cu = 80 kPa, = 0, and Df = 2 m.

36
8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity
COMPENSATED FOUNDATIONS
The settlement of a mat foundation can be reduced by
decreasing the net pressure increase on soil and by
increasing the depth of embedment, Df. This increase is
particularly important for mats on soft clays, where large
consolidation settlements are expected. In this design, the
deeper basement is made below the higher portion of the
superstructure, so that the net pressure increase in soil at any
depth is relatively uniform. From the figure shown, the net
average applied pressure on soil can be given as

Where:
Q = dead load of the structure and live load
A = area of the mat

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity
COMPENSATED FOUNDATIONS
For no increase of the net soil pressure on soil below a mat foundation, q
should be zero. Thus,

=

This relation for Df is usually referred to as the depth of embedment of a
fully compensated foundation. (The fully compensated mat foundation is one in
which the net increase in soil pressure below the mat is zero.)

The factor of safety against bearing capacity failure for partially


compensated foundation (that is, Df < Q/A) may be given as

() ()
= =

37
8/22/2017

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

EXAMPLE
PROBLEM 13. The mat has dimensions of
40 m x 20 m, and the live load and dead
load on the mat are 200 MN. the mat is
placed over a layer of soft clay that has a
unit weight of 17.5 kN/m3. Find the Df for a
fully compensated foundations.

FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Shallow Foundations-Bearing Capacity

EXAMPLE
PROBLEM 14. Refer to Problem 13. For
the clay, cu = 60 kN/m3. If the required
factor of safety against bearing capacity
failure is 3, determine the depth of the
foundation.

38