of non-homogeneity, and suo is the undrained shear strength of ses show that the maximum moment is sustained with
ned with a positive
the soil at the level of the foundation base. Bransby and
Randolph (1998) proposed that the collapse mechanism for a
footing under combined loading is based on two different com­
ponent mechanisms: the 'scoep' mechanism and the 'wedge'
mechanism, as illustrated in Figure 3.2.
Three-dimensional analyses of circular foundations subjected
to combined loading under undrained conditions has been de­
scribed by Taiebat and Carter (2000a). They compared predic­
tions of a number of the failure criteria described previously with
their three-dimensional finite element predictions of the failure
surface. The sign conventions for loads and moment used in this
study are based on the right-handed axes and clockwise positive
conventions, (V, M, H), as described by Butterfield et al. (1997)
and shown in Figure 3.3.
Vertical-Horizontal (V-H) Loading
Taiebat and Carter’s finite element prediction of the failure en­
velope in the V-H plane is presented in Figure 3.4, together with
the conventional solution of Vesic (1975), Equation (3.1), and
the modified expression of Bolton (1979), Equation (3.4) with a
shape factor Q= 1.2. Comparison of the curves in Figure 3.4
shows that the numerical analyses generally give a more conser­
vative bearing capacity for foundations subjected to inclined
load. The results of the numerical analyses are very close to the
results of the modified theoretical expression of Bolton (1979).
All three methods indicate that there is a critical angle of in­
clination, measured from the vertical direction, beyond which
the ultimate horizontal resistance of the foundation dictates the
failure of the foundation. Where the inclination angle is more
than the critical value, the vertical force does not have any influ­
ence on the horizontal capacity of the foundation. For circular
foundations the critical angle is predicted to be approximately
19° by the numerical studies and from the modified expression
of Bolton (1979), compared to 13° predicted by the conventional
method of Vesic (1975). In Figure 3.5, the non-dimensional form
of the failure envelope predicted by the finite element analyses is
compared with those of Vesic (1975), Equation (3.1), Bolton
(1979), Equation (3.4), Murff (1994), Equation (3.6), and
Bransby and Randolph (1998), Equation (3.7). The shape of the
failure locus predicted by the numerical analyses is closest to the
modified expression of Bolton (1979). It can be seen that the
conventional method gives a good approximation of the failure
locus except for high values of horizontal loads. The failure lo­
cus presented by Murff (1994) gives a very conservative ap­
proximation of the other failure loci.
Vertical-Moment (V-M) Loading
For a circular foundation on an undrained clay subjected to pure
moment, an ultimate capacity of Mu= 0.8A.D.su was predicted
by the finite element analysis of Taiebat and Carter (2000). In
Figure 3.6 the predicted failure envelope is compared with those
of Murff, Equation (3.6), and Bransby and Randolph, Equa­
tion (3.7). The failure envelopes approximated by Murff (1994)
and Bransby and Randolph (1998) are both conservative with re­
spect to the failure envelope predicted by the numerical analyses.
It is noted that the equations presented by Bransby and Randolph
were suggested for strip footings, rather than the circular footing
considered here.
Horizontal-Moment (H-M) Loading
The failure locus predicted for horizontal load and moment is
plotted in Figure 3.7. A maximum moment capacity of
M = 0.&9A.D.s,, is coincident with a horizontal load of
H = 0.7 lA. v This is 11% greater than the capacity predicted for
the foundation under pure moment.
A non-dimensional form of the predicted failure locus and the
suggestions of Murff (1994) and Bransby and Randolph (1998)
are plotted in Figure 3.8. It can be seen that the locus suggested
by Murff (1994) is symmetric and the maximum moment coin­
cides with zero horizontal loading, whereas the numerical analy­
2537
horizontal load, as already described. The failure locus obtained
from Murff s equation becomes non-conservative when
M x H < 0. Bransby and Randolph (1998) identified two differ­
ent upper bound plasticity mechanisms for strip footings under
moment and horizontal load, a scoop mechanism and a
scoop-wedge mechanism (Figure 3.2). The latter mechanism re­
sults in greater ultimate moment capacity for strip footings, sup­
porting the finite element predictions.
General Failure Equation
An accurate three-dimensional equation for the failure envelope
in its complete form, which accounts for both the load inclina­
tion and eccentricity, is likely to be a complex expression. Some
degree of simplification is essential in order to obtain a conven­
ient form of this failure envelope. Depending on the level of the
simplification, different classes of failure equations may be ob­
tained.
In the previous section, the failure envelopes suggested by
different methods were compared in two-dimensional loading
planes. It was demonstrated that the failure equation presented
by Murff (1994) has simplicity in its mathematical form, but
does not fit the failure envelopes produced by the conventional
and numerical analyses. The failure equation presented by
Bransby and Randolph (1998) for strip footings matches the data
for circular footings in two planes, but does not give a suitable
answer in three-dimensional load space.
A new equation describing the failure locus in terms of all
three components of the load has been proposed recently by
Taiebat and Carter (2000a). In formulating this equation, advan­
tage was taken of the fact that the moment capacity of the foun­
dation is related to the horizontal load acting simultaneously on
the foundation. The proposed approximate failure equation is
expressed as:
\\ 2
/ „ \ 3
V_ M H .M H
/ = 1-a, + -1 = 0 (3.9)
V~ h ,\ m \ H
n \ )
where a.\ is a factor that depends on the soil profile. For a homo­
geneous soil a value of cti = 0.3 provides a good fit to the bear­
ing capacity predictions from the numerical analysis. Perhaps in­
evitably, the three-dimensional failure locus described by
Equation (3.9) will not tightly match the numerical predictions
over the entire range of loads, especially around the abrupt
changes in the failure locus that occur when the horizontal load
is high. However, overall the approximation is satisfactory, con­
servative and sufficient for many practical applications. Equa­
tion (3.9) is shown as a contour plot in Figure 3.9.
3.2.3 Bearing capacity under eccentrically applied loading
There is no exact expression to evaluate the effects of eccentric­
ity of the load applied to a foundation. However, the effective
width method is commonly used in the analysis of foundations
subjected to eccentric loading (e.g., Vesic, 1973; Meyerhof,
1951, 1953). In this method, the bearing capacity of a foundation
subjected to an eccentrically applied vertical loading is assumed
to be equivalent to the bearing capacity of another foundation
with a fictitious effective area on which the vertical load is cen­
trally applied.
Studies aimed at determining the shape of the failure locus in
(V-M) space (e.g., Taiebat and Carter, 2000a, 2000b; Houlsby
and Puzrin, 1999) are relevant, because this loading case is also
directly applicable to the analysis of a footing to which vertical
load is eccentrically applied.
Finite element modelling of the problem of the bearing ca­
pacity of strip and circular footings on the surface of a uniform
homogeneous undrained clay layer, subjected to vertical load
and moment was described by Taiebat and Carter (2000b). It was
also assumed in this particular study that the contact between the
footing and the soil was unable to sustain tension. The failure