10.

Recent BC Theories
Skemptons Theory for Cohesive Soil
Skempton 1951 suggested a bearing capacity theory for
saturated clay for which u = 0.
Value of Ncincreased with the increase in Df/B ratio.
Expression for Ncproposed by Skempton:
For Strip footings,
Nc= 5(1+0.2Df/B), with Nc 7.5 ---------- (1)
For square and circular footings,
Nc= 6(1+0.2Df/B), with Nc 9.0 ---------- (2)
For rectangular footings,
Nc= 5(1+0.2Df/B) (1+0.2B/L) for Df/B 2.5 ------(3)
=7.5(1+0.2Df/B) (1+0.2B/L) for Df/B > 2.5 ------(4)
For u = 0 condition, the net ultimate bearing capacity is
given by:

qnu= cuN ---------- (5)

See Page No. 121,

RK Poudel

Alternatively, the graph given in Fig.1 can be

used to find Nc.
Where,

Nc(rect) = Nc(sq) [0.84 + 0.16B/L]

 Meyerhof (1963) General BC equation which

considers the Shape, Depth and the Load
Inclination.

General form of BC equation suggested by Meyerhof -

 Shape factor (s) : To determine the

bearing capacity of square, rectangular
and circular footings.
Depth factor (d) : To account for the
shearing resistance developed along the
failure surface in soil above the base of
the footing.
Load Inclination factor (i) : To
determine the bearing capacity of a
footing on which the direction of load
application is inclined at a certain angle
to the vertical.

Meyerhofs BC Equation in
Another Way

Hansens (1970) BC Equation

Hansen (1970) extended Meyerhofs BC equation by
including two additional factors : Ground factors (g) and
Base factors (b) to consider foundation on slopes
(ground inclination) and base tilt of the foundation
(base inclination).
Widely used because the equation can be used for both
shallow as well as deep foundation.
qu= cNcscdcicgcbc + q0Nqsqdqiqgqbq + 0.5 B N s d i g
b
Where,

s, d, i, g, b are the shape, depth, load inclination, ground and

base factors
For pure cohesive soil ( = 0)
qu= cNc(1 + sc+ dc ic gc- bc) + q0

Shape Factors

Sc = 0.2 B/L

Sc= 1+(Nq/Nc).
(B/L)

Sc= 1 for strip

Depth Factors

dc = 0.4 k

dc= 1 + 0.4k
k = D/B for D/B 1,
k = tan-1D/B for
[D/B>1]
k in radians

Inclination Factors Other Factors

Ground factors
(base on slope)

ic = 0.5 0.5(1H/Afca)
ic= iq (1-iq)/(Nq 1)

gc = 0/1470

gc= 1 - 0/1470

Sq= 1 + B/L sin dq= 1+2tan(1sin)2k

k defined above

iq= [1-(0.5H)/(V+
Afcacot)]5

gq= g
= (1-0.5 tan)5

Sq= 1-0.4B/L

i=[1-(0.7H)/(V+
Afcacot)]5
i = [1-{0.7H
(0/4500)5}
/{V+ Afcacot}]a2

d = 1 for all

Base factors
(tilted base)
bc= 0/1470
bc= 1- 0/1470
bq= e^(-2 tan)
b = e^(-2.7
tan)
in radians

Table
Hansens Shape,
Depth, load
Inclination,
Ground and Base
Inclination factors.
when = 0

See Page
No. 118 and
119,
RK Poudel

Vesics BC Equation
Vesic (1973, 1974)

 All three investigators (Meyerhof, Hansen

and Vesic) use the equations proposed by
Prandtl (1921) for computing the values of
Nc and Nq wherein the foundation base is
assumed as smooth with the angle =
45 + /2

Values of Nc, Nq and Meyerhof (M),

Hansen (H) and Vesic (V) N
Factors

Shape, Depth and Load Inclination

Factors of Meyerhof, Hansen and
Vesic

6.11 Bearing Capacity from In-situ Tests

(Plate Load Test)
Plate load test is used to estimate the
allowable pressure of soil and settlement.
Usually plates square or round,
Ranging in sizes from 30 to 60 cm and
thickness about 2.5 cm.
Plate load tests are expensive.
In sand they are usually carried out when the
project is big and numbers of footings are too
many.
In clay where unconfined compression tests
are not feasible due to presence of fissures and
cracks, PLT is used to determine the UBC.

See Page No. 26

RK Poudel

Test Procedure of PLT

A pit 5 times the size of plate is excavated at the
proposed depth of foundation. The pit is leveled and
the test plate is placed at the center of the pit.
A seating load of 70 gm/cm2is applied and released
after some time.
The plate is loaded either through a kentledge or by the
reaction through a truss or a beam.
The load is applied in the increments of 1/5thof
the design load or 1/10thof failure load.
For each increment of load, four dial gauges are used
on the plate to measure the settlement.
Next higher load is applied when the rate of settlement
of the plate becomes 0.25 mm per hour.
Test is continued until failure or to a load 2.5
times the design load, whichever is earlier.

Gravity Loading or
Through Kentledge

Against Reaction Bea

Reaction against Truss

Load Settlement Curves

Terzaghi and Peck (1948) for

square footings in granular soils.

Limitations of PLT

Size Effect
Scale Effect
Time Effect
Interpretation of Failure Load
Water Table
Only Applicable for Immediate Settlement
Short Duration Test so do not predict
consolidation settlement
Do not significant for clayey soils to find
allowable pressure
reliable only in the case of homogeneous
sand deposit.

BC from SPT-value (N)

Allowable Bearing Pressure ,qna on the

Basis of Shear Failure CriteriaTeng (1962) has suggested the BC in

sands for
strip,
circular or square and
raft
foundation from the results of SPT.

Strip footingqna= 0.0167N2BRW1+ 0.0277(100 + N2)DfRW2

---------- (1)
Square or circular footingqna= 0.011N2BRW1+ 0.033(100 + N2)DfRW2
---------- (2)
Raft foundationqna= 0.02N2BRW1+ 0.06(100 + N2)DfRW2
---------- (3)
Where,
B = Width of foundation (m)
N = Corrected SPT value

 Allowable Bearing Pressure, qna on

the Basis of Settlement Criteria In sand in most of the cases the BC is
governed by settlement criteria.

Correlation between SPT-Value

and Allowable Bearing Pressure
by Terzaghi and Peak
Terzaghi and Peck (1948) first
proposed a correlation between the
corrected N-value and Allowable
Bearing Pressure to give a
settlement of 25 mm for a deep
ground water table.

Procedures:
N should not be corrected with
respect to overburden.
N should be averaged from the
given values.
The graph has been developed with
the condition that the water table is
deep.
If the WT is not deep the correction
is applied on the obtained allowable
soil pressure (qa) by a correction
factor of RW.
RW= {1 + Dw/(D + B)} ---- (1)
qa(corrected) = qa(graph) RW ---(2)

See Page No. 123, RK Poudel

Modification of Terzaghi and Peck

Correlation by Peck, Hanson and
Thornburn
Peck, Hanson and Thornburn (1974)
For settlement of 25 mm

Procedures:
N- valueshould be corrected with
respect to dilatancy and overburden.
Average of the corrected value is
considered.
qais obtained from the graph of (Df/B)
verses N (corrected SPT) value.
If the WT is not deep the Correction is
applied on the obtained allowable soil
pressure (qa) by a correction factor of
RW= {1 + Dw/(D + B)} ---- (1)
qa(corrected) = qa(graph) RW

See Page No. 125

RK Poudel

 Peck, Hanson and Thornburn

(1974
Net safe bearing capacity of spread
footing to give a permissible
settlement s and a differential
settlement of 3/4th of s.
qns= 0.042 RWN s ---------- (1)
s = Permissible settlement, mm

6.12 Types of Settlement and Their

Relationships
Settlement Vertical displacement or shift
from the original level of placement.
Foundation Settlement Vertical downward
Shifting of the foundation (and the structure
built upon it) due to the decrease in volume of
the soil on which it is built.
Implications on a Foundation of
Settlement
Appearance of structure
Utility of structure
Damage to the structure

Causes of Settlement
Static loads
Dynamic forces from vibrations excited by
machinery, traffic, earthquakes, etc.
Mining and tunneling operations
Variations in GWT (seasonal variation, artificial
lowering and raising of GWT)
Settlement of frost heaved soil
Shrinkage and swelling of soil
Thermal changes
Landslides
Creep on clay slopes
Changes in the vicinity due to construction of new
structure so increase in stress cause settlement.

Types of Settlement
A)On the Basis of Movement of
Foundation
1)
2)
a)
b)

Uniform Settlement
Non-uniform Settlement
Tilt
Angular Distortion

B) On the basis of Loads Imposed

on a Foundation
1) Immediate or Elastic Settlement (Si or Se)
Takes place in a short time (about a week) after
application of load
It is due to elastic distortion of the soil.
Computed by elastic theory.
Very small and often neglected unless the
structure is very important.
2) Consolidation Settlement (Sc)
3) Secondary Consolidation Settlement (Ss)

Total Settlement (S) = Si + Sc + Ss )

Calculation of Se or Si
Se or Si of Cohesive Soils
1) Schleichers (1926) Method -
To determine the elastic settlement of footings on
Saturated Clay.
si= qB(1-2)Is/E
Where, si= Immediate settlement
q = Load on foundation
B = Smaller dimension of the loaded area
= Poissons Ratio (= 0.5 for saturated clay)
Is= Influence coefficient
E = Modulus of elasticity
For a rectangular area, the settlement at the center
= four times the settlement at the corner.

Value of Isfor a Saturated Clay

Layer of Semi-infinite Extent
Shape of
Loaded
Area
Circular
Rectangu
lar (L/B)
1.0
1.5
2.0
5.0
10.0
100.0

Centre

Flexible
Corner

Rigid
Average

1.00

0.64

0.85

0.80

0.95
1.20
1.31
1.83
2.25
2.96

0.90
1.09
1.22
1.68
2.02
2.70

1.12
1.36
1.53
2.10
2.52
3.38

0.56
0.68
0.77
1.05
1.26
1.69

Janbu, Bjerrum and Kjaernslis (or

Janbu et. al.) Method
To compute average immediate settlement
under a flexible compressible foundation
in saturated undrained clays.
si= 01qB/Eu ---------- (3)
Where, si= Average immediate settlement for
flexible footing
01= Shape factors obtained from the charts
shown in Fig.2
Eu= Undrained modulus of elasticity of the soil
q = Load on foundation
B = Smaller dimension of the loaded area

= Shape factors obtained from the charts shown in Fig

Se or Si of Cohesionless Soils
Schmertmann and Hertman
(1978)s Method

Calculation of Consolidation Settlement (Sc)

sc= H e/(1 + e0)
= mvPH
For NC clay, Sc is given by:

Where, H = Significant depth

e= Change in void ratio
e0= Initial void ratio
P = Change in pressure
mV= Coefficient of volume compressibility
Cc= Compression Index
P0= Effective overburden pressure
Cc= 0.009(wL- 10)

Calculation of Secondary
Settlement (Ss)

ss= HfCslog[(t1+t)/t1]
Where,
ss= settlement in time t after
completion of consolidation settlement
and
t1= time of completion of consolidation
settlement.
Hf= thickness of compressible stratum.
Cs= slope of secondary branch of the
time compression curve.

6.13 Allowable Settlement

and Allowable Bearing
Pressure
6.13.1Allowable/Per
missible/Tolerable/A
cceptable
Settlement
Defined as the
maximum amount
of settlementthat
a structurecan
tolerate without
impairing its
structural integrity
or function

Total and Differential Settlements

Total settlement of a structure is the
maximum amount the structure has settled
with respect to its original position.
If different parts of a structure are subjected
to differentsettlement. This is known
asdifferentialsettlement.
i.e. Different amount ofsettlementwithin same
structure is known asdifferential settlement.

 Differential
settlement
can
be
computed as the difference in
settlement between two adjacent
points.
Difficult to measure so it is expressed
in terms of Computed Maximum
Permissible Total Settlement.
Differential Settlement is not to
exceed 3/4th of the Computed
Maximum
Permissible
Total
Settlement.

Relation Between Total and Differential Settlement

Bjerrum (1963) From the graph, ( =

difference between two footings spaced by
distance, L)
See Page No. 130, RK Poudel

Sands Maximum Differential Settlement rarely

ceeds 3/4 of the Maximum Permissible Total Settleme

See Page No. 131, RK Poudel

In Clays Max. Differential Settlement rarely

exceeds of the Max. Permissible Total
Settlement.

6.13.2 Allowable Bearing Pressure

or Capacity
Defined as Maximum Safe Soil
Pressure at the base of the
foundation which neither causes
Shear Failure nor produces any
Settlement beyond permissible
limits.

 Terzaghi and Peck (1967):

qns= 1.37(N-3){(B+0.3)/2B}2RwRdS
Where, qns= Net Safe Bearing Pressure, kN/m2
Rd= Depth correction factor = 1 + 0.2Df/B
1.2
S = Permissible Settlement in mm but B and
Df in meters.

 Tengs Method (1962)

qns= 35(N-3){(B+0.3)/2B}2RWRd
Where, qns= Net Safe Bearing Pressure,
kN/m2
Rd= Depth correction factor = 1 +
0.2Df/B 1.2
General Form of Above Equation :
qns= 1.4(N-3){(B+0.3)/2B}2RwRdS
Where, S = Permissible Settlement in mm
but B and Df in meters.

Meyerhof (1974) slightly different from

Tengs equation.
qns= 12NRwRdfor B 1.2m
qns= 8N{(B+0.3)/B}2RwRdfor B >1.2 m
Where, qns= Net safe bearing pressure, kN/m2
Rd= Depth correction factor = 1 + 0.33Df/B
1.33

 Bowles Method(1982)- The equation

proposed by Meyerhof and Teng were found to be
very conservative and Bowles modified these
equations.

Tengs Modified Equation:

qns53(N-3){(B+0.3)/2B}2RwRd

Meyerhofs Modified Equation:

qns= 20NRWRdfor B 1.2 m and
qns= 12.5N{(B+0.3)/B}2RWRdfor B >1.2 m
Where, qns= Net safe bearing pressure, kN/m 2
Rd= Depth correction factor = 1+ 0.33 D f/B 1.33.

6.14 Steps Involved in the

Proportion of Footings
Objective: To reduce the differential
settlement due to live load variations
for footings on granular soils, it is
desirable to proportion all the footings
in such a way that they have equal
pressures under the service loads.
So all the footings would settle by
equal amounts and the differential
settlement would be considerably
reduced.

Steps on Proportioning as Suggested

by Peck et al (1974) and Procedures
are
by self-weight
Teng (1976)
1. Determine
deadGiven
load (inclusive
of column and
estimated value of footing) of all the footings.
2. Determine the footing subjected to maximum live load.
3. Compute the ratio of live load to dead load for each of the
footing.
4. Identify the governing footing. (The footing having maximum
live load to dead load ratio is the governing footing.)
5. Find the area of the governing footing (Ag).
Ag= (DL+LL) / Allowable bearing capacity
6. Determine service load for all the footings. ( Service load = DL +
Reduced LL)
7. Determine the design bearing capacity (q d) of all the footings
except the governing footing.
qd= Service load of the governing footing / A g
8. Determine the area under other footings.
A = Service load of that footing / q d