VOL.

1 1,
INTERNATIONALJOURNAL FOR NUMERICAL A N D ANALYTICAL METHODS I N GEOMECHANICS, 1-1 5 (1987)

VERTICAL DEFORMATION OF RIGID FOUNDATIONS

OF ARBITRARY SHAPE ON LAYERED SOIL MEDIA

Y . K.CHOW
Department of Civil Engineering, National University of Singapore. Singapore

SUMMARY
A numerical procedure is described for the analysis of vertical deformation of smooth, rigid foundations of
arbitrary shape on homogeneous and layered soil media. The contact area at the interface of the foundation
and soil medium is approximated by square subdivisions.The response of the system is then obtained from the
superpositionof the influence of the individual subdivisions.The flexibility influence coefficients are based on
equivalent smooth, rigid circular areas with the same contact area as the square subdivisions.For foundations
on a homogeneous, isotropic elastic half-space, the flexibility coelfcients are given analytically by the
integrated forms of the Boussinesq’s solution. For a layered soil medium, the flexibility coefficients are
determined from an axisymmetric finite element analysis which is essentially two dimensional. Thus, there is
no necessity for a full three-dimensionalfinite element analysis.Comparison with solutions obtained using the
integral transform technique for smooth, rigid rectangular foundations on a homogeneous, isotropic elastic
half-space shows good agreement. Parametric solutions are presented for the response of rectangular
foundations on some ‘typical’ soil profiles. The use of a simplified method to estimate the settlement of
rectangular foundations on a layered soil medium by superposing solutions for homogeneous,elastic strata is
discussed.

INTRODUCTION
The finite element method is a very powerful tool available to an engineer for the analysis of
geotechnical engineering problems. However, for the analysis of vertical deformation of rigid
foundations of arbitrary shape, the three-dimensional nature of the problem requires excessive
computer resources, as well as data preparation time, making the method uneconomical except for
important projects. More economical methods have been developed which enable the response of
arbitrary shaped foundations to be determined at a reasonable cost. Cheung and Zienkiewicz’
proposed a method for the analysis of surface foundations of arbitrary flexibility. Butterfield and
Banerjee’ extended the approach to include both surface and embedded rigid foundations.
However, in both cases, the soil model is restricted to a homogeneous, isotropic elastic half-space.
Brown and Gibson3 considered a soil with stiffness increasing linearly with depth, but only results
for flexible foundations were reported. Wardle and Fraser4 and Fraser and Wardle’ generalized
the foregoing methods to enable the response of rectangular foundations on layered soil media to
be determined. The method involves the use of integral transforms6 which are difficult to evaluate.
Moreover, computer programs based on this approach are not widely available. However, the
approach is a significant advancement, enabling foundations resting on layered soil media to be
analysed in a rational manner.
This paper describes an alternative numerical procedure which enables the vertical deformation
of smooth, rigid foundations of arbitrary shape resting on layered soil media to be determined at a
reasonable cost. The stresses experienced by the soil are assumed to be sufficiently small such that

0363-9061/87/01OOO1-15$07.50 Received 15 July 1985

0 1987 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Revised I5 November 1985
2 Y. K.CHOW

the media behave essentially in a linear elastic manner. The soil properties are assumed to be
isotropic. Parametric solutions are presented for smooth, rigid rectangular foundations on a
homogeneous half-space, a homogeneous elastic stratum, a layered soil overlying a rigid base and a
soil layer with stiffness increasing linearly with depth. Comparisons are made with published
solutions where these are available.

NUMERICAL PROCEDURE
The irregular geometry of the contact area at the interface of the arbitrary shaped rigid foundation
and the soil medium is approximated by square subdivisions (see Figure 1). A ‘relaxed’ boundary
condition is assumed at the interface of the foundation and the soil medium such that the tangential
shear stresses are zero. Physically, this implies a perfectly smooth base for the foundation. The
influence of the roughness of the foundation base on its settlement is studied in some detail by
Carrier and Christian.’ For a rigid circular foundation resting on a homogeneous half-space, the
maximum difference between the rough foundation and smooth foundation settlements occurs at
a soil Poisson’s ratio v = 0 and is approximately 10 per cent. For v 2 0.3, the rough foundation and
smooth foundation solutions are nearly equal. For a rigid circular foundation resting on a non-
homogeneous half-space where the soil stiffness is proportional to depth, the solutions for a rough
foundation and smooth foundation are the same when v = 0.5, and the maximum difference occurs
at v = 0 and is less than 3 per cent.
If the vertical stresses (or loads) over each subdivisions are known, then the deformation of a
subdivision i (see Figure 1) may be obtained by superposition from the following equation:
j=n
wi= 1 F..P.
j= 1
1J J

in which F i j is the flexibility coefficient denoting the deformation at subdivision i due to a unit load
acting on subdivisionj (see Figure 1); P, is the value of load acting on subdivision j (see Figure 1);
and n is the number of square subdivisions. Equation (1) may be written for each of the subdivisions
making up the rigid foundation resulting in the following matrix equation:
Iw> = CF1 {PI (2)

Figure I. Schematic representation of a foundation of arbitrary shape on a layered soil medium

 LAYERED SOIL MEDIA 3

in which { w > is a displacement vector; [ F ] a matrix of flexibility coefficients; and { P} a vector of

vertical loads acting on the soil medium. However, for a rigid foundation (PI is not known and has
to be determined. If the vertical loads acting on the rigid foundation are such that no rotation of the
foundation takes place, the foundation will settle uniformly. Thus setting {w} = { I } in
equation (2), the contact forces corresponding to a unit displacement of the foundation may be
determined from the solution of equation (2) if [ F ] is known. Summation of these contact forces
gives the total load acting on the rigid foundation, and hence the load-deformation relationship of
the foundation may be obtained. The remaining problem now is the determination of the flexibility
coefficients in matrix [F] in equation (2).
One of the main differences between the present approach and earlier methods lies in the manner
in which the flexibility influence coefficients are determined. In earlier methods, the flexibility
coefficients are based on uniformly loaded areas. Intuitively, it would be more accurate to obtain
these coefficients based on rigid loaded areas for a rigid foundation and this approach has been
adopted in the present method. The mathematical difficulties associated with determining the
flexibility coefficients based on rigid loaded square/rectangular areas are obvious. To circumvent
these difficulties, the rigid square subdivisions are replaced by equivalent rigid circular areas with
the same contact area. It is reasonable to assume that the vertical deformation of a rigid circular
foundation does not differ appreciably from that of a rigid square foundation with the same contact
area. Some evidence to substantiate this approximation are presented in subsequent sections. At
locations of interest outside the loaded area, the differences in the influence of the two areas would
be even less significant. As the number of subdivisions increases, the errors become smaller.
The flexibility coefficients in matrix [F] in equation (2) are presented for the following cases: (i) a
homogeneous, isotropic elastic half-space; and (ii) a layered soil medium. The flexibility coefficients
for the above cases are determined using the procedures described below.

Flexibility coeffjcients for a homogeneous, isotropic elastic half-space

The flexibility coefficients in the numerical procedure may be obtained from the load-
deformation relationship of a smooth, rigid circular surface footing on a homogeneous, isotropic
elastic half-space. They are given by analytical solutions which are obtained from the integrated
form of the Boussinesq’s solution.’
1-v2 r
w(r) = -P O<-<I (3)
2 Er, r0
in which w(r) is the vertical deformation of foundation; v the Poisson’s ratio of the soil; E the
Young’s modulus of the soil; ro the radius of circular footing; P the applied vertical load; and r the
radial distance from the centre of the footing. The accuracy of approximating a square subdivision
of side a by an equivalent circular area of radius ro with the same contact area may be assessed by
replacing ro in equation ( 3 ) by the equivalent radius ro = a/,/n, giving
(1 - v 2 ) r
w(r) = 0886 ~ P O<-<l (4)
Ea r0
The load-deformation relationship of a rigid square of side, a obtained by Fraser and Wardle’
using the integral transform technique, is given by
(1 -VZ)
w = 0.87- (5)
Ea P
Comparison of equations (4) and ( 5 ) indicates that the error involved in approximating the load-
4 Y. K.CHOW

deformation relationship of a square subdivision by that of an equivalent circular area is only

about 2 per cent for this problem. Outside the loaded circular area, the vertical settlement of the
ground surface is given by9

Thus, the flexibility coefficients for a square subdivision of side a may be determined from
equations (3) and (6)by substituting ro = a / , / n .The flexibility coefficient of the square subdivision
due to load acting on itself (i.e. at i ) is given by

and the influence on subdivision i due to loads on the remaining subdivisions may be obtained
from

with the substitution of an appropriate r value for the radial distance.

The load-deformation relationship of the arbitrary shaped rigid foundation resting on the
surface of a homogeneous, isotropic elastic half-space may be obtained as summarized below:

1. Discretize the contact area of foundation into square subdivisions (see Figure 1).
2. Evaluate the flexibility coefficients in matrix [ F ] in equation (2) using equation (7) for the
diagonal elements and equation (8) for the ofl-diagonal elements.
3. Solve equation (2) with { w ) = ( 1 ) (i.e. uniform deformation of the foundation) to give the
contact forces { P } .
4. Sum the forces in { P } to give the total force acting on the foundation to cause a unit
deformation.

Since the soil medium is assumed to behave in a linear elastic manner, the load-deformation
behaviour of the foundation has now been established.
Homogeneous soil conditions are rarely encountered in practice. This soil model is useful for
preliminary analysis due to its relative simplicity. For a more realistic estimate of the deformation
of the foundation, the inhomogeneity of the soil may have to be considered. Analytical solution for
the load-deformation behaviour of a smooth, rigid circular foundation resting on the surface of a
generally layered soil medium is not available. Thus one needs to resort to some form of numerical
methods of analysis. A numerical procedure for the determination of the flexibility coefficients for a
layered soil medium is described in the following subsection.

Flexihility coeflcients lor a layered soil medium

Wardle and Fraser4 solved this problem through the use of integral transform technique based
on the work of Gerrard and Harrison.6 However, these integral transforms are difficult to evaluate
and computer programs based on this approach are not widely available.
Since the square subdivisions in the present work are approximated by equivalent circular areas,
the flexibility coefficients in equation (2) may be convenient obtained from an axisymmetric
finite element analysis which is essentially two dimensional. The inclusion of soil layering is a
 LAYERED SOIL MEDIA 5

1 2 3
Figure 2. Local co-ordinates in isoparametric element

relatively simple matter. Thus results from a two-dimensional analysis may be used to determine
the response of a three-dimensional problem. The flexibility coefficients are determined directly
from a smooth, rigid circular footing analysis. Thus, there is no further need to perform numerical
integrations to obtain the influence of the distributed loads. In the axisymmetric finite element
analysis, the smooth, rigid footing is modelled through a prescribed displacement procedure in
which a uniform settlement is prescribed to the element nodes supposedly in contact with the
footing. The loads required to cause this uniform settlement is recovered though the stresses at the
Gaussian integration points via a numerical integration procedure. Details of the numerical
procedure for a prescribed displacement analysis may be seen in Reference 11.
Although the deformations in the finite element analysis are only explicitly given at the nodal
points, the deformation at any location on the ground surface can be determined using the element
shape functions of the isoparametric elements. For the quadratic isoparametric elements used
exclusively in this paper, the vertical deformation at the ground surface may be evaluated from (see
Figure 2):
+
w = N ~ w ~N ~ w , + N 3 ~ 3 (9)
in which wl,w 2 , w 3 are vertical deformations at nodes 1, 2, and 3, respectively;

N
r
--(t- 1);
'-2
N2=1- r2;
N3 =:(l
L
+ t);
and t is the local co-ordinate in the isoparametric element. The local co-ordinate may be
determined from

(1 1)

in which T is the radial distance from the centre of rigid circular footing; rl,rz,r3 are radial co-
ordinates of nodes 1,2 and 3, respectively (see Figure 2).
The flexibility coefficients Fij which correspond to the deformation of subdivision i due to a unit
load applied at subdivision j may be obtained from equation (9) for a unit load acting on the
smooth, rigid circular foundation. Thus, the response of the arbitrary shaped foundation on a
layered soil medium may be obtained following the procedure summarized in the foregoing
subsection with the flexibility coefficients calculated using equation (9) at stage 2.
In this procedure, only a single axisymmetric finite element analysis is required should
foundation bases with different geometries need to be investigated. The influence of other
subdivisions may be readily obtained by a physical shift in the reference axis. The computing costs
are probably higher when compared to the integral transform technique in evaluating the
flexibility coefficients, but the wide availability of such finite element computer programs should
6 Y.K.CHOW

encourage the use of this approach. Isotropic and anisotropic soil properties may be dealt with, but
the method is restricted to horizontally layered soil of 'inlinite' lateral extent. In this paper, only
isotropic soil properties are considered.
It may be noted here that the axisymmetric finite element procedure described herein may be
used to obtained the approximate flexibility coefficients for the homogeneous, elastic half-space
described in the foregoing subsection,but a suficiently large model of the domain must be used and
thereby increasing the cost of analysis. Thus, for a thick homogeneous soil layer, it would be more
cost effective to use the analytical expressions in equations (7) and (8) to obtain the approximate
flexibility coefficients. However, in many practical situations, the stiffness of the soil generally
varies with depth and this has to be reflected in the finite element model through the appropriate
modelling of the soil layers.
In the finite element analyses, the stiffness matrices of the quadratic isoparametric elements are
numerically obtained with 'exact' integration (i.e. 3 x 3 Gaussian integration points). The
programs are run on an IBM 3081 computer with double precision arithmetic which gives an
approximate accuracy of 17 significant digits. Poisson's ratio of the soil of up to v = 0.4999 has been
used without numerical problems. The linearly increasing stiffness of the soil within the element is
easily handled through the numerical integration process.

NUMERICAL RESULTS

Rectangular foundation on homogeneous half-space

The load-deformation behaviour of smooth, rigid rectangular foundations on a homogeneous,
isotropic elastic half-space may be analysed using the foregoing numerical procedure in which the
flexibility coefficients are obtained from analytical solutions based on the integrated form of the
Boussinesq's solution.' These coefficients are given in equations (7) and (8). The finite element
procedure is not so appropriate here for reasons discussed previously.The rectangular contact area
at the interface of the foundation and the soil medium is discretized into appropriate square
subdivisions. For example, Figure 3 shows a discretization of the contact area of a rectangular
foundation with a length to breadth ratio, LIB = 2 (in which L is the length offoundation; and B the
breadth of foundation) into 16 x 8 subdivisions. Equation (1) is written for each of the 128
subdivisions shown in Figure 3 to represent the settlement of each subdivisioni due to loads acting
on itself and on the rest of the surrounding subdivisions. The corresponding flexibility coefficients
F , are evaluated from equations (7) and (8), respectively. The resulting equation (2) in matrix form
is solved with { w} = { l} to give the force required to produce a unit deformation of the foundation.
It may be noted that the symmetry of the discretized contact area may be exploited, leading to a
reduced set of simultaneous equations in equation (2).

L '
Figure 3. Discretization of contact area of rectangular foundation with LIB = 2 into 16 x 8 subdivisions
 LAYERED SOIL MEDIA 7

Table I. Convergence of solution for square foundations on a homogeneous, isotropic

elastic half-space
Contact area discretization: Displacement influence value, I,
No. of subdivisions Present approach Fraser and Wardle’
2x2 0.897 1 -
4x4 0.8778 -
8x8 0.8703 0801
12 x 12 0.8683 0823
16 x 16 0.8675 0.835
20 x 20 0-8671 0.842

The vertical deformation of a smooth, rigid rectangular foundation on a homogeneous isotropic

elastic half-space may be evaluated from
@(I - v2)
W=
E I,
in which q is the applied vertical pressure; B the breadth of foundation; and I, the displacement
influence value. The convergence of the present approach is compared with the integral transform
method used by Fraser and Wardle’ for a smooth, rigid square foundation and the results are
tabulated in Table I (note that the results from Fraser and Wardle’ are measured from their
Figure 1). The present method converges rapidly to a value of I, = 0.867 compared to I = 0.87
obtained by Fraser and Wardle’ based on an extrapolation technique. In general, the integral
transform method appears to be more sensitive to the mesh discretization and converges at a
slower rate. For example, the displacement influence value for a 8 x 8 subdivisions discretization,
,
the present approach gives I = 0.8703, which is less than 0.5 per cent of the converged value
compared to I, = 0.801 due to Fraser and Wardle’ which is in error by about 8 per cent. Even for a
20 x 20 subdivisions discretization, the integral transform method gives I, = 0.842 which is still in
error by about 3 per cent. Since the equations in both approaches are fully coupled, the storage
requirements for the flexibility coefficients increase with the square of the number of subdivisions
(the symmetry of the problem may however, be taken into account). This in turn leads to a
significant increase in the solution time for the simultaneous equations in equation (2). The
implication is that the present approach is more economical.
The solid line in Figure4 shows the displacement influence values for rectangles of various
length to breadth ratios LIB obtained using the present approach. The results obtained by Fraser
and Wardle’ are also indicated and they are in good agreement. Note that the results from Fraser
and Wardles are again based on an extrapolation technique, whereas the present method uses 8
subdivisions along the breadth dimension with the corresponding number of subdivisions along
the length dimension (see Figure 3 for an example of a foundation with LIB = 2). This fine
discretization of the contact area has been used throughout the paper to minimize errors in the
solutions.

Rectangular foundation on homogeneous elastic stratum

Figure 5 shows a rectangular foundation of breadth B, resting on a homogeneous soil layer of
thickness H, overlying a rigid base. For this particular problem, the analytical solutions for the
flexibility coefficients based on the integrated form of the Boussinesq’s solution are no longer
applicable. The flexibility coefficients for the current problem are obtained from axisymmetric
8 Y.K.CHOW

0 Frorer ond Wordlcs

0 2 L 6 8 10 12

LIB
Figure 4. Displacement influence values for smooth, rigid rectangular foundations on a homogeneous, isotropic elastic
half-space

t+-i

Rigid

Figure 5. Rectangular foundation on a homogeneous elastic stratum

finite element analyses. The response of rectangular foundations is computed as in the previous
example. The accuracy of the finite element method in determining the vertical deformation of a
smooth, rigid circular foundation on a homogeneous soil layer is assessed by comparing with
solutions by Brown" in Figure6. In general, the agreement is reasonable.
Table I1 compares the displacement influence values I, (see equation (12)) for square foundations
resting on layers of different thickness and their equivalent circular foundations (based on equal
contact areas). The maximum difference in the solutions is only about 2 per cent. This further
supports the approximation of the square subdivisions by equivalent circular areas used in the
numerical procedure. The response of rectangular foundations on layers of various thickness and
Poisson's ratio of the soil v = 0, 0.3 and 0.4999 are also computed and the results are shown in
 LAYERED SOIL MEDIA 9

b
B

- Finite elements

0 Brownlo

I I
0 2 L 6 0 10 12

H /re
Figure 6. Comparison of solutions for the response of smooth, rigid circular foundations on a homogeneous layer

Table 11. Displacement influence values I , for square foundations and

equivalent circular foundations on a homogeneous, elastic stratum (v = 0.3)

1 2 4 6

Square 0.507 0.670 0.768 0.796

Equivalent circle 0.497 0.660 0.760 0.793

Table 111. Displacement influence values 1 , for rectangular foundations with

LIB = 2 on a homogeneous, elastic stratum (v = 0.4999)

I 2 4 6

Present approach 0.416 0.695 0.905 0968

Fraser and Wardle' 0.438 0.740 0.936 1.018
Janbu et al." 0.67 0.93 1.1 1 1.20

Figure 7. For this problem, Fraser and Wardle' presented a limited range of results and they are
also included in Figure 7 for comparison. The agreement between the results is reasonably good. A
useful design chart given by Janbu et aL'* and also published in a book by Simons and Menzies13
provides estimates of the average immediate settlement of uniformly loaded, flexible rectangular
foundations on an incompressible elastic soil stratum. Comparison of solutions by Janbu et af.12
Fraser and Wardle' and the present approach indicates that the average settlement of uniformly
loaded, flexible rectangular foundations generally overestimates the deformation of equivalent
smooth, rigid rectangular foundations. For example, Table 111 shows the displacement influence
10 Y.K.CHOW

1.6
8
6
c
1.2
2
I,
0.8 1

0.4
B Fmrw and Wardlc’

0
/ I I I I
9 =o.o
I
1.6 c-
LB
‘I
e-

1.2

1,
0 .a

0.4

0
1.6

LIB
1.2

1,
0.8

04

C
1 $ = 0.4999

0 1 2 3 4 5 6
H/B
Figure 7. Displacement influence values for smooth, rigid rectangular foundations on a homogeneous elastic stratum.

values I , for rectangular foundations with LIB = 2 resting on soil layers with varying thickness
obtained using the three methods.
For this particular problem, the Poisson’s ratio of the soil is shown to have a significant
influence on the deformation of the foundation. For the incompressible soil, the solutions for
 LAYERED SOIL MEDIA 11

0.58 1 2E E 2E

B m fRigid
Case 1 Case 2 Case 3

Figure 8. Rectangular foundation on a layered soil medium

Table IV. Displacement influence values I, for square foundations and

equivalent circular foundations on a layered soil medium

I , (v = 0 3 ) I , (v = 04999)
Equivalent Equivalent
Case Square circle Square circle
1 0-454 0.464 0376 0377
2 0370 0375 0.322 0322
3 0.297 0.300 0.269 0.270

rectangular foundations with increasing lengthbreadth ratios converge rapidly to the plane strain
case. The plane strain solutions are obtained using the finite element method. Comparing Figures 4
and 7 indicates that even at HIE = 6, the rigid base has an important influence on the deformation
of the foundation. This influence is more pronounced for foundations with higher lengthbreadth
ratios and foundations where the soil tends towards a state of incompressibility.

Rectangular foundation on layered soil medium

The application of the proposed numerical procedure for the analysis of smooth, rigid
rectangular foundations on a layered soil medium is demonstrated. The soil profile considered
consists of three distinct layers overlying a rigid base; and three different distribution of the
Young’s modulus of the soil are analysed as shown in Figure 8. Discretization of the rectangular
contact area follows the previous examples. The flexibility coefficients for the layered profiles are
determined from axisymmetric finite element analyses. No published solutions to these problems
are known to the author. The deformation of rigid square foundations is compared to that of
equivalent circular foundations in Table IV to give an indication of the validity of the following
assumptions made in the numerical procedure: (i) the approximation of square subdivisions by
equivalent circular areas; and (ii) the superposing of the influence of the subdivisions to give the
settlement of the square foundation (which comprises 8 x 8 subdivisions). The maximum difference
12 Y. K.CHOW

Table V. Displacement influence values I I for rectangular foundations on a layered soil medium
(a) v = 0-3

Displacement influence value, I I

LIB= 1 LIB = 2 LIB = 4
Case Present Superposed Present Superposed Present Superposed
approach solution approach solution approach solution

I 0454 0.440 0.516 0.498 0552 0.542

2 0.370 0.390 0.442 0452 0488 0.498
3 0.297 0.335 0.395 0.445 0.466 0.520

(b) v =0.4999

Displacement influence value, I

LIB= 1 LIB = 2 LIB = 4
Case Present Superposed Present Superposed Present Superposed
approach solution approach solution approach solution

1 0.376 0.346 0.40I 0.373 0.402 0.382

2 0322 0.358 0.360 0391 0.368 0.400
3 0269 0.349 0.333 0440 0.358 0.474

in the two solutions is only about 2 per cent. Thus, the assumptions made in the procedure appear
to be reasonable.
Settlement of rectangular foundations on layered soil may be estimated by superposing the
separate compression of each layer obtained using single layer solutions. The reader is referred to
the book by Simons and Menzies13 for a detailed description of the method. The single layer
solutions commonly used are based on the works of Janbu et a/.” However, as discussed in the
foregoing subsection, Janbu et a!.” solutions are for determining the average settlement of
uniformly loaded, flexible rectangular foundations which generally overestimates the settlement of
equivalent smooth, rigid rectangular foundations. Thus, the more appropriate single layer
solutions for smooth, rigid rectangular foundations may be obtained from the present work, and
they are given in Figure7. The expression for the displacement influence value If is given in
equation (12).
Table V compares the solutions for rectangular foundations resting on the layered soil profile
shown in Figure8 obtained using the present approach (i.e. the numerical procedure) and those

-
obtained by superposing the single layer solutions. For soil with a constant Poisson’s ratio v = 0.3,
the solutions by the two methods agree reasonably well; the maximum differences for rectangular
foundations with various LIB ratios for cases 1,2 and 3 are about 4,5 and 13 per cent, respectively.

E(01
1 I \

Rigid

Figure 9. Rectangular foundation on a layer with stiNness increasing linearly with depth
 LAYERED SOIL MEDIA 13

4 1 1 I I L y 7
I I I I

(C) 3 :0.3

I2

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

E (0 I/E(B)
Figure 10. Displacement influence values for smooth, rigid rectangular foundations on a layer with stiffness increasing
linearly with depth (a) LIB = I, (b) 4 8 = 2; (c) 4 8 = 4; (d) 4 B = 8

Whereas for soil with a constant Poisson’s ratio, v = 0.4999,the maximum differences for cases 1,2
and 3 are about 8, 11 and 32 per cent respectively. The solutions are less satisfactory in cases where
the soil stiffness decreases with depth, in particular when v=O4999. However, in view of the
uncertainties involved, for example in the estimated elastic soil properties and their distribution,
the solutions may well be acceptable in practice. Thus, it appears that for most practical problems,
the single layer solutions in Figure7 can be superposed to give a reasonable estimate of the
settlement of smooth, rigid rectangular foundations resting on the surface of a layered soil medium;
in particular in soil where the stiffness increases with depth.

Rectangular foundation on soil layer with stiflness increasing linearly with depth
There are wide practical applications in considering a soil layer which has a stiffness that
increases linearly with depth. This problem is depicted schematically in Figure 9.The Young’s
14 Y. K.CHOW

modulus of the soil is assumed to vary according to the following equation:

E ( z ) = E(0) +MZ (13)
in which E(z)is the Young’s modulus of the soil at depth z; E(0) the Young’s modulus of the soil at
the ground surface; and rn the rate of increase in Young’s modulus. The vertical deformation of the
smooth, rigid rectangular foundation may be expressed as

in which q is the applied vertical pressure; B the breadth of foundation; E(B) the value of Young’s
modulus at depth B; and I , the displacement influence value. The flexibility coefficients for this
problem are obtained from finite element analyses. The linearly increasing Young’s modulus
within the finite element layer is easily incorporated in the numerical integration process during the
formulation of the element stiffness matrices. Parametric solutions are presented for a constant soil
Poisson’s ratio 1’ = 0.3 and varying degrees of soil inhomogeneity for rectangular foundations with
length/breadth ratios, LIB = 1, 2, 4 and 8 in Figure 10. For H / B = 0.2 (corresponding to a thin
layer), increasing the length/breadth ratio does not affect the deformation of the foundation
significantly for a given applied pressure q. However, as the soil layer thickness increases, this effect
is more pronounced. As the soil becomes more non-homogeneous (i.e. as the value of E(O)/E(B)
ratio decreases), the influence of the layer thickness appears to become less significant
for H / B > I .

CONCLUSIONS
A numerical procedure has been described which enables the vertical deformation of smooth, rigid
foundations of arbitrary shape resting on homogeneous or layered soil media to be determined.
Comparison of this present method with the integral transform technique’ for determining the
response of a square foundation on a homogeneous, isotropic elastic half-space shows that the
present method converges more rapidly and thus is more economical. Similar solutions for
foundations on layered soil media are not available for comparison. Parametric solutions have
been presented for smooth, rigid rectangular foundations resting on a homogeneous half-space, a
homogeneous elastic stratum and a soil layer with stiffness increasing linearly with depth. These
solutions enable a quick estimate of the foundation response under the conditions considered. The
settlement of smooth, rigid rectangular foundations on a layered soil medium has also been
computed for a limited number of cases. It appears that in most practical problems, the solutions
for homogeneous, elastic strata may be superposed to give a reasonable estimate for the layered soil
solutions; in particular when the stiffness of the soil increases with depth.
Although solutions have only been reported on rectangular foundations, the approach is general
enough to consider foundation bases with unusual geometries, e.g. some offshore gravity platforms
have tripod-like base configurations. The interaction of foundations placed in close proximity to
one another may also be assessed.

APPENDIX I: NOTATION
a = Dimension of square subdivision.
B = Breadth ofrectangular foundation.
E = Young’s modulus of soil.
E(O) = Young’s modulus of soil at ground surface.
E(B) = Young’s modulus of soil at depth B.
 LAYERED SOIL MEDIA 15

= Young’s modulus of soil at depth z.

= Flexibility coeficient denoting the deformation at i due to unit load at j.
= Flexibility matrix.
= Thickness of soil layer.
= Displacement influence value for rectangular foundation.
= Displacement influence value for rectangular foundation on a soil layer with
stiffness increasing linearly with depth.
= Length of rectangular foundation.
= Rate of increase of Young’s modulus with depth.
= Number of square subdivisions.
= Shape functions of isoparametric elements.
= Applied vertical load.
= Interaction load acting at location j.
= Interaction load vector.
= Applied vertical pressure.
= Radial co-ordinate.
= Radius of equivalent circular footing.
= Radial co-ordinates of nodes 1, 2 and 3, respectively, of isoparametric element.
= Vertical deformation of foundation.
=Vertical deformation of square subdivision at i.
= Vertical deformation at radial distance r.
= Vertical deformation vector.
= Depth co-ordinate.
= Local co-ordinate in isoparametric element.
= Poisson’s ratio of soil.

REFERENCES
1. Y.K. Cheung and 0.C. Zienkiewicz, ‘Plates and tanks on elastic foundation-an application of finite element
method’, Int. J . Solids Struct., 1 (4), 451-461 (1965).
2. R. Butterfield and P. K. Banerjee, ‘A rigid disc embedded in an elastic half-space’, Geotech. Eng., 2 (I), 35-52 (1971).
3. P. T. Brown and R. E. Gibson, ‘Rectangular loads on inhomogeneous elastic soil’. J . Soil Mech. Found. Div., Proc.
ASCE, 99 (SMlO), 917-920 (1973).
4. L. J. Wardle and R. A. Fraser, ‘Finite element analysis of a plate on a layered cross-anisotropic foundation’, Proc. First
Int. Conf. Finite Element Methods Engng, University of New South Wales, Australia, pp. 565-578 (1974).
5. R. A. Fraser and L. J. Wardle, ‘Numerical analysis of rectangular rafts on layered foundations’, Geotech., 26 (4),613-
630 (1976).
6. C. M. Gerrard and W. J. Harrison, ‘The analysis of a loaded half-space comprised of anisotropic layers’, Technical
Paper N o . 10, CSlRO Division of Applied Geomechanics, Melbourne (1971).
7. W. D. Carrier and J. T. Christian, ‘Rigid circular plate resting on a non-homogeneous elastic half-space’, Geotech., 23
(1). 67-84 (1973).
8. S . P. Timoshenko and J. N. Goodier, Theory o/Elasticity, 3nd edn, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1970.
9. A. P. S. Selvadurai, Elastic Analysis of Soil-Foundation Interaction, Elsevier, Amsterdam, (1979).
10. P. T. Brown, ‘Numerical analyses of uniformly loaded circular rafts on elastic layers of finite depth’, Geotech., 19 (2)
301-306 (1969).
11. I. M. Smith, Programming the Finite Element Method with Application to Geomechanics, Wiley, New York, 1982.
12. N. Janbu, L. Bjerrum and B. Kjaernsli, Veiledning ved Losning av Fundamenteringsoppgaver, N.G.I. Publication N o .
16 (1956).
13. N. E. Simons and Menzies, A Short Course in Foundation Engineering, Butterworth, London, 1977.