Sixth International Conference on

Recent Advances in Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics

August 1 – 6, 2016, IIT Roorkee Extension Centre, 20 Knowledge Park II, Greater Noida, India

SEISMIC BEARING CAPACITY OF SKIRTED FOOTING ON SLOPE

Rajesh Prasad Shukla Ravi Sankar Jakka
Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee
Roorkee, U.K., India, 247667 Roorkee, U.K., India, 247667

ABSTRACT

Skirted foundations are widely used to increase the capacity of foundation of offshore structures and shallow foundation resting on
low bearing soil. This paper reports the result of numerical analysis performed to determine the effect of skirt on ultimate capacity of
footing under seismic loading. A series of plane-strain finite element analyses were performed with the variation of depth ratio of
foundation, pseudo-static coefficient, strength parameters of soil and length of skirt. Four pseudo-static coefficients magnitude, 0.05,
0.1, 0.15 and 0.2 were used to incorporate the effect of earthquake. Length of skirt was varied from 0.5B to 2B. Three depth ratio, 0,
0.5B and B are considered for parametric study. Study result shows that skirt causes a notable increase in the ultimate capacity of
footing. Influence of skirt length is more significant for footings resting on ground surface. In case of footing resting on ground
surface, provision of skirt of length 1.5B causes to increase in the ultimate capacity by four times of initial capacity. Effect of skirt
length becomes very nominal for a footing of depth ratio one. Capacity increases linearly with increases in the depth ratio of footing,
but influence of depth of foundation became insignificant for high skirt lengths. Ultimate capacity of skirted foundation decreased
linearly with increase in pseudo-static coefficient.

INTRODUCTION

A wide variety of methods are available to reduce the
settlement of footing and improve the bearing capacity of
loose and week soil, such as chemical mixing, incorporation of
reinforcement, mechanical stabilization and many more. Civil
engineers are working continually to develop an economical
and effective method to improve the performance of soil under
footing loading. It was found that incorporation of skirts is an
effective method to improve the behaviour of foundation
(Meyerhof 1953).
Skirted foundation is considered as shallow foundation with a
vertical projection that embedded to a particular depth below
the foundation level. Skirted foundations are widely used to
increase the capacity of foundation of offshore structures and
shallow foundation with low bearing (Purkayastha & Char
1977.
Construction of skirt increases in the depth of footing and
confinement of soil below the foundation. The vertical bearing
capacity of skirted foundations were evaluated by numerous
researchers using numerical, experimental and analytical
methods, and it was found that bearing capacity increases
significantly with provision of skirts (Barari & Ibsen 2011,
Gourvenec & Mana 2011, Martin 2011, Byrne & Houlsby
2002, Bransby & Randolph, 1998, Gourvene & Randolph
2010) Skirted foundation with vertical loading is equivalent to
a shallow foundations of depth equal to the skirt length (Byrne
& Houlsby 2002). Eid (2013) conducted study on medium and
dense sand and found that extent of improvement was
increased with increase in depth of skirts, width of foundation.
It is decreasing with increase in the relative density of sand.
Various studies confirmed that load-settlement behaviour of
foundation is improved with provision of skirts (Punrattanasin
et al. 2003, Al-Aghbari & Dutta 2008, and Punrattanasin et al.
2009)
Skirt foundations are effective in circumstances, where, water
scour is a major problem (Bransby & Randolph, 1998,
Gourvene & Randolph 2010, Tripathy 2013). It can be used in
the case of foundations resting on or near the sloping ground
(Azzam & Farouk 2010). In hilly region, lack of soil on the
slope side of the footings causes reduction in the stability of
the footing and bearing capacity. Reduction in the bearing
capacity and stability of footing are due to availability of less
confinement and less overburden pressure on slope side.
Reduced confinement and overburden pressure decrease the
passive resistance of soil (Shukla & Jakka 2014). Under these
circumstance, skirted foundation can be very beneficial at

Paper No. 174 1

slopes.

Most of earlier studies were conducted either on the level

ground or foundation on sloping ground under static loading.
In this study a foundation resting near the slope was analyzed
under earthquake loading. Various parameters such as skirt
length, friction angle, pseudo-static coefficient and setback
distance were considered in the analysis.
Fig 1. Problem used in present study
PARAMETERS CONSIDERED IN ANALYSIS
RESULT AND DISCUSSION
Cohesion-less soil was considered for analysis. A reasonable
range of soil properties, setback distance and pseudo-static Analysis is conducted for φ=30, 35 and 40 0. It was found that
coefficient was assumed for numerical analysis. Detail of the magnitude in improvement is different, but trends of
parametric study is shown in table 1. Horizontal pseudo static graphs are similar for almost all cases. Here, results are
coefficient value of 0.05, 0.1 and 0.15 were chosen to consider presented for φ=350 only.
the seismic loading as earthquakes of higher acceleration
coefficient are very rare. A constant value of seismic Effect of skirts length
acceleration assumed for soil as well as foundation.
Ultimate capacity is increasing with increase in the skirt
Table 1 Details of parametric study length. Effect of skirt length is shown in Fig 2 and it shows
that skirts are more effective in case of steep slopes.
Soil type Parameters Values No. of Efficiency of skirts are very high up to L/B=1 for slope
analysis gradient of 1/3 and 1/4 but in case of higher slope gradient
Slope gradient 1/2, 1/3, (1/2), capacity is increasing linearly up to L/B=1.5.
1/4
Cohesion-
Setback distance B, 3B, 5B
less soil
(φ=300, 675
350 and Skirt length (L) 0, 0.5B, B,
400) 1.5B, 2.0B
Horizontal 0, 0.05,
Pseudo-static 0.10, 0.15,
coefficient 0.20

METHOD OF ANALYSIS

Soil was assumed as an isotropic and homogeneous material

and failure of soil mass is governed by Mohr-Coulomb (a)
criteria. Pseudo static analysis was used to consider the effect
of earthquake. Finite-element analyses were carried out by 1700
applying the load in the in the form of vertical load multiplier.
The foundation was modelled as a rigid material with a unit
Ultimate Capacity (kPa)

weight of 24kN/m3 while the skirt was modelled as a plate 1400

element. Connection between foundation and skirts was made
rigid. Connection between footing and plate was assumed as
1100
similar to Eid (2013). Interface strength factor was assumed as
one [13].
800 αh=0.00
Problem considered for analysis is shown Fig 1. First, a αh=0.05
αh=0.10
footing on level ground was assumed for analysis, then same αh=0.20
footing was analyzed for slopes. A series of plane-strain finite 500
element analyses were performed with the variation of depth 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
ratio of foundation, pseudo-static coefficient, soil friction Skirt length/width of footing
angle and length of skirt.
(b)

Paper No. 174 2

 (b)
(c)
Fig. 2 Effect of skirt length on ultimate capacity of skirted
footing; (a) for slope 1/2, (b) for slope 1/3, (c) for slope ¼

Effect of slope gradient

Fig 3 shows that the ultimate capacity of footing is reducing

with increase in the slope gradient. Effect of slope gradient is
very significant in case of lower setback distance for a
particular soil and foundation characteristics.

Foundation resting near slope is subjected to lower confining

pressure and surcharge loading, so bearing capacity is
adversely affected by the slope. Foundation location can be
decided on basis of slope gradient as well as setback distance.
For a setback distance of 5B, effect of slope gradient is
negligible.
(c)
Fig. 3 Effect of slope gradient on bearing capacity of footing;
(a) for setback B, (b) for setback 3B, (c) for setback 5B

Effect of pseudo-static coefficient

Ultimate capacity of footing is reducing with increase in the

pseudo-static coefficient. Effect of pseudo-static coefficient
for different value of slope gradient is shown in Fig 4.

(a)

(a)

Paper No. 174 3

 (b) (a)

(c)
Fig. 4 Effect of pseudo-static coefficient on ultimate capacity (b)
of footing; (a) for slope 1/2, (b) for slope 1/3 and (c) for slope
1/4.

Effect of pseudo-static coefficient is more prominent for the

footing resting near the steep gradient. Slopes of high gradient
are most of time marginally stable, but an earthquake can
make it unstable.

Effect of friction angle

Effect of friction angle on bearing capacity of footing resting

at a distance 5B from slope crest is shown in fig 5. Bearing
capacity is increasing exponentially with increase in the soil
friction angle. Effect of friction angle is more prominent for a
footing without skirt. Effect of friction angle in the bearing
capacity enhancement is reducing with increase in the skirt
length (L). (c)
Fig. 5 Effect of friction angle on ultimate capacity of a footing
(a) for L/B=0, (b) for L/B=1.0B, (c) for L/B=2.0B

Paper No. 174 4

CONCLUSION
Presence of slope is adversely affecting the capacity of
footing. Ultimate capacity of footing is reducing with increase
in the pseudo-static coefficient and slope gradient. Effect of
slope gradient is very significant in case of lower setback
distance for a particular soil and foundation characteristics
Effect of pseudo-static coefficient is more prominent for the
footing resting near the steep gradient. Ultimate capacity is
increasing with increase in the skirt length. Skirts are more
effective in case of steep slope. Bearing capacity in increasing
exponentially with increase in the soil friction angle. Effect of
friction angle is more prominent for a footing without skirt,
and effect of friction angle in reducing with increase in the
skirt length
REFERENCES
1. Al-Aghbari, M.Y. and Dutta R.K. 2008), “Performance of
square footing with structural skirt resting on sand”,
Geomechanics and Geoengineering: An International
Journal Vol. 3, No. 4, December 2008, 271—277.
2. Azzam W. R. and Farouk A. (2010), “Experimental and
Numerical Studies of Sand Slopes Loaded with Skirted
Strip Footing”, Electronic journal of geotechnical
engineering, 795-812.
3. Barari, A., Ibsen, L. B. (2011), “Effect of embedment on
the vertical bearing capacity of bucket foundations in
clay”, Proc. of 2011 Pan-Am CGS Geotechnical Conf.,
Toronto, Canada.
4. Bransby, M. F., and Randolph, M. F. (1998), “Combined
loading of skirted foundations.” Geotechnique, 48(5),
637–655.
5. Byrne, B. W., and Houlsby, G. T. (2002), “Experimental
investigations of the response of suction caissons to
transient vertical loading”, J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng.,
128(11), 926–939.
6. Eid, H.T., 2012. Bearing capacity and settlement of
skirted shallow foundations on sand. International Journal
of Geomechanics, 13(5), 645-652.
7. Gourvenec, S. M. and Mana, D. S. K. (2011), “Undrained
vertical bearing capacity factors for shallow foundations”,
Paper No. 174
Géotechnique Letters 1 (2011), pp. 101–108.
8. Gourvenec, S. and Randolph, M.F. (2010),
“Consolidation beneath skirted foundations.” Int. J.
Geomechanics., 10(1), 22–29.
9. Hisham T. Eid (2013), “Bearing Capacity and Settlement
of Skirted Shallow Foundations on Sand”, Int. J.
Geomech. 13:645-652.
10. Martin, C. M. (2011), “Vertical bearing capacity of
skirted circular foundations on Tresca soil”, Proc. of 15th
Intl. Conf. on Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical
Engineering, Istanbul, vol. 1, 2011, pp. 743–746.
11. Mohammed Yousuf Al-Aghbari and R.K. Dutta (2008),
“Performance of square footing with structural skirt
resting on sand”, Geomechanics and Geoengineering: An
International Journal Vol. 3, No. 4, December 2008,
271—277.
12. Punrattanasin, P., Gasaluck, W., Muktabhant, C.,
Angsuwotai, P., and Patjanasuntorn, A. (2009). “The
effect of sheet pile length on the capacity of sheet pile
foundation.” Proc., 17th Int. Conf. on Soil Mechanics and
Geotechnical Engineering, Vol. 1, Millpress Science
Publishers, Rotterdam, Netherlands, 598–601.
13. Shukla, R.P. and Jakka, R.S. (2014), “A Critical Review
on Seismic Bearing Capacity of Foundation on Sloping
Ground”, International Symposium Geohazards: Science,
Engineering and Management. Paper No. EQ-15, 449-
458.
14. Stergiou, T, Terzis, D and Georgiadis K. (2015),
“Undrained bearing capacity of tripod skirted foundations
under eccentric loading” Geotechnik 38 (2015), Heft 1.
15. Tripathy, S. (2013), “Load carrying capacity of skirted
foundation on sand”, Master Thesis. National Institute
of Technology, Rourkela.
16. Villalobos, F., Byrne, B. W., Houlsby, G. T., and Martin,
C. M. (2003). “Bearing capacity tests of scale suction
caisson footings on sand: Experimental data.” Data Rep.
FOT005/1, Department of Engineering Science,
University of Oxford, Oxford, U.K.
5