University of Hong Kong Department of Civil Engineering

MSc(Eng) in Geotechnical Engineering

CIVL6027 Foundation Engineering

Instructors:
Prof. Jun Yang (coordinator) Office: HW 6-25
E-mail: junyang@[Link];
Homepage: [Link]
Dr. JSH Kwan E-mail: hkumscels@[Link]

Class schedule: Wednesday 7:00 p.m. – 9:30 p.m.

Assessment:

Type Percentage of Total (%)

Written examination 75

Coursework 25
Suggested References

1. BDBuildings Department (2004). Code of Practice for

Foundations. Buildings Department, The Government of the
Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.

2. Bowles, J. E. (1988; 1996). Foundation Analysis and Design,

4th & 5th Editions, McGraw-Hill, New York, New York.
(Call # 624.15 B787).

3. Coduto D.P. (1994). Foundation Design: Principles and

Practices. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J. (Call #
624.15 C67).

4. Das, B.M. Principles of Foundation Engineering. 4th ed.,

Pacific Grove, PWS Pub. 1999 (Call # 624.15 D22).

5. Geotechnical Engineering Office (1993). Guide to Retaining

Wall Design: Geoguide 1, 2nd Edition (Call # HK 624.164
H7 for LIB USE ONLY; LB 624.164 H7).

6. Geotechnical Engineering Office (1997). Pile Design and

Construction, GEO Publication No. 1/96, 1996 (Call # LB
624.154 P62).

7. Poulos, H. G., and Davis, E. H. (1980). Pile Foundation

Analysis and Design, Wiley, New York, New York (Call #
624.154 P87).

8. Tomlinson, M. J. (1994). Pile Design and Construction

Practice, 4th Edition, Cement and Concrete Association,
London, England (Call # LB 624.154 T65).
 SI* (MODERN METRIC) CONVERSION FACTORS
APPROXIMATE CONVERSIONS TO SI UNITS
Symbol When You Know Multiply By To Find Symbol
LENGTH
in inches 25.4 millimeters mm
ft feet 0.305 meters m
yd yards 0.914 meters m
mi miles 1.61 kilometers km
AREA
2 2
in square inches 645.2 square millimeters mm
2 2
ft square feet 0.093 square meters m
2 2
yd square yard 0.836 square meters m
ac acres 0.405 hectares ha
2 2
mi square miles 2.59 square kilometers km
VOLUME
fl oz fluid ounces 29.57 milliliters mL
gal gallons 3.785 liters L
ft3 cubic feet 0.028 cubic meters m3
3 3
yd cubic yards 0.765 cubic meters m
3
NOTE: volumes greater than 1000 L shall be shown in m
MASS
oz ounces 28.35 grams g
lb pounds 0.454 kilograms kg
T short tons (2000 lb) 0.907 megagrams (or "metric ton") Mg (or "t")
TEMPERATURE (exact degrees)
o o
F Fahrenheit 5 (F-32)/9 Celsius C
or (F-32)/1.8
ILLUMINATION
fc foot-candles 10.76 lux lx
fl foot-Lamberts 3.426 candela/m2 cd/m2
FORCE and PRESSURE or STRESS
lbf poundforce 4.45 newtons N
lbf/in2 poundforce per square inch 6.89 kilopascals kPa

APPROXIMATE CONVERSIONS FROM SI UNITS

Symbol When You Know Multiply By To Find Symbol
LENGTH
mm millimeters 0.039 inches in
m meters 3.28 feet ft
m meters 1.09 yards yd
km kilometers 0.621 miles mi
AREA
2 2
mm square millimeters 0.0016 square inches in
m2 square meters 10.764 square feet ft2
2 2
m square meters 1.195 square yards yd
ha hectares 2.47 acres ac
2 2
km square kilometers 0.386 square miles mi
VOLUME
mL milliliters 0.034 fluid ounces fl oz
L liters 0.264 gallons gal
3 3
m cubic meters 35.314 cubic feet ft
3 3
m cubic meters 1.307 cubic yards yd
MASS
g grams 0.035 ounces oz
kg kilograms 2.202 pounds lb
Mg (or "t") megagrams (or "metric ton") 1.103 short tons (2000 lb) T
TEMPERATURE (exact degrees)
o o
C Celsius 1.8C+32 Fahrenheit F
ILLUMINATION
lx lux 0.0929 foot-candles fc
2 2
cd/m candela/m 0.2919 foot-Lamberts fl
FORCE and PRESSURE or STRESS
N newtons 0.225 poundforce lbf
2
kPa kilopascals 0.145 poundforce per square inch lbf/in
*SI is the symbol for the International System of Units. Appropriate rounding should be made to comply with Section 4 of ASTM E380.
(Revised March 2003)

ii
 Two fundamental problems in foundation
engineering:

 Bearing capacity/Stability: no collapse

 Settlement/Deformation: tolerable settlement

Prof J Yang 1
 Topics to Be Covered

 General design concepts and approach

 Shallow foundations
 Pile foundations
 Excavation and lateral support systems
 Case histories

Prof J Yang 2
 Design Philosophy

Resistance (R) > Loads (S)

Safe region (design

criterion satisfied)

Increasing level
R=S
Capacity (R)

of safety

Design
criteria

Safety
margin Unsafe region
(design criterion not
satisfied)

Demand (S)

Prof J Yang 3
 Design Philosophy

 Working Load/Stress Design (WSD)

 Limit State Design (LSD)

Prof J Yang 4
 Design Philosophy

 Working Load/Stress Design (WSD)

The basis of the design is to ensure that throughout the

structure, when it is subject to the working or service applied
load, the induced stresses are less than the allowable stresses.

P (allow) =Ru/FS
P (working) < P (allow)

Ru: The ultimate resistance of a structural or foundation element

FS: Global factor of safety

Ranges of global factor of safety commonly used in

foundation design (Terzaghi and Peck, 1967)

Item Factor of safety, FS

Retaining structures, excavations 1.5-2

Foundations 2-3
Uplift heave 1.5-2
Piping 2-3

Piles (with load tests) 1.5-2.0

Piles (with dynamic formulae) 3

Prof J Yang 5
 Design Philosophy

 Limit State Design (LSD)

In general, this design considers separately the two classes of

ultimate and serviceability limit states using partial factors of
safety. The factored resistance for design must be greater than
or equal to the factored load effects.

Ru > S

Ru: Ultimate resistance : Resistance factor (<1.0)

S: Design action/load : Load factor (>1.0)

Design Philosophy

 Limit States

Defined as conditions under which a structure or its component

members no longer perform their intended functions.

Whenever a structure or part of a structure fails to satisfy one

of its intended performance criteria, it is said to have reached a
limit state.

Prof J Yang 6
 Design Philosophy

 Ultimate limit state

Involving the total or partial collapse of the structure or

foundation.

 Serviceability limit state

Representing those conditions which affect the function or
service requirements/performance of the structure under
expected service or working loads.

North American Approach (factored resistance approach)

Prof J Yang 7
 European Approach (factored strength approach)

Partial factors for foundation design

(Meyerhof, 1993; 1995)

Item Factor of safety, FS

Dead loads 1.1

Live loads 1.5

Friction (tan’) 1.25

Cohesion (c) 1.4-1.6

Prof J Yang 8
 Shallow Foundation

 Load transferred to soil

at depth of a surface
excavation
 Better for lightweight
structures on less
problematic soil
 Less expansive

Deep Foundation

 Load transferred to soil

at significant depth
 Typically used for heavy
structures on
problematic soil
 More expansive

Prof J Yang 9
 Df
Df

Df/B typically less than 1.0 Df/B as large as 50

Bearing Capacity of Shallow

Foundation

Failure modes of shallow foundation

 General shear failure

 Local shear failure
 Punch shear failure

Prof J Yang 10
 Bearing Capacity of Shallow
Foundation
General shear failure
-abrupt, sudden. Failure surface extends to
ground surface.
-Typically in dense sand or stiff clay

q
Q

qu

Failure Surface

Bearing Capacity of Shallow

Foundation
Local shear failure
-Failure surface does not extend to ground surface. occurs
slowly, with substantial settlement.
-More likely in medium sand or clayey soil
q
Q

Failure
Surface qu

Prof J Yang 11
 Bearing Capacity of Shallow
Foundation
Punching shear failure
-continuous punching failure and settlement with gradual
increase in q .
-More likely in loose sand and soft clay

q
Q

Failure 
Surface

qu?

Vesic (1963, 1973)

Prof J Yang 12
 Terzaghi Bearing Capacity
Theory
Q

’ = Df
Df

I III 45°- /2

=
II

Spiral

qu = qc + qq + q

Limit equilibrium analysis

Basic Assumptions

 Depth of foundation  width (i.e. Df  B)

 Rough bottom, foundation does not slide
 homogeneous, semi-infinite, isotropic soil mass
 Mohr-Coulomb failure criteria
 Rigid foundation in comparison to soil stiffness
 Soil above bottom of footing acts as surcharge only
and has no strength
 Plane strain (strip footing), then extended to square
and circular footings

Prof J Yang 13
 Terzaghi Bearing Capacity
Equation

Strip

q u  1 . 0 cN c  D f  N q  0 . 5  B N 

Square

q u  1 . 3 cN c  D f  N q  0 . 4  B N 

Circular

q u  1 . 3 cN c  D f  N q  0 . 3  B N 

Bearing Capacity Factors

a2
Nq  a   e ( 0.75    / 2 ) tan 
2cos (45   / 2)
2

Nq  1 2 ( N q  1) tan 
Nc  N 
tan  1  0 . 4 sin( 4  )

Prof J Yang 14
 1000 1000 1000

General
General Shear
100 Shear 100 Failure 100
Failure General

Bearing Capacity Factor, N

Shear

Bearing Capacity Factor, Nq

Bearing Capacity Factor, Nc

Failure
10 10 10
Local
Shear
Local
Failure
1 Shear 1
1
Failure
Local
Shear
Failure
0.1 0.1 0.1

0.01 0.01 0.01

0 10 20 30 40 50 0 10 20 30 40 50 0 10 20 30 40 50

Friction Angle, degrees Friction Angle, degrees Friction Angle, degrees

Effect of groundwater

Df

d
B

Case I: d≥(Df+B)

Prof J Yang 15
 Effect of groundwater

Df
d

Case II: Df  d <(Df+B)

Effect of groundwater

d
Df

Case III: 0<d<Df

Prof J Yang 16
 Effect of groundwater

Df

Case IV: d=0

Development of Bearing
Capacity Theory

 Meyerhof (1963):
Used  = (45 + /2) and included shear strength in
soil above footing, inclined and eccentric loads
 Brinch Hansen (1970):
Similar to Meyerhof, but accounted for slope and
tilted base
 Vesic (1973):
Similar to Hansen with modified inclination, slope,
and tilt factors
 All three methods use same Nc and Nq, but have
different N

Prof J Yang 17
 Meyerhof Bearing Capacity
Equation
qu= cNcFcsFcdFci + qNqFqsFqdFqi + ½ BNFsFdFi

 Q

Fcs, Fqs, Fs = shape factors

Df q = Df

Fcd, Fqd, Fd= depth factors

Soil:
B , c, 

Fci, Fqi, Fi = load inclination factors

Shape Factor (Fs)

B 
For ( = 0°) Fcs  1  0 . 20   Fqs = Fs = 1.00
L 

B   
Fcs  1  0 .20   tan 2  45  
For ( 10°) L  2

B  2 
Fqs = Fs  1  0 .10   tan  45  
L
   2 

For (0° < <10°) Interpolation

Prof J Yang 18
 Depth Factor (Fd)

D 
For ( = 0°) Fcd  1  0 . 20  f  Fqd = Fd = 1.00
 B 


Fcd  1  0.20 f  tan 45  
D
For ( 10°) B
   2 

D   
Fqd = Fd  1  0 .10  f  tan  45  
 B   2

For (0° < <10°) Interpolation

Inclination Factor (Fi)

2
For ( = 0°)     Fi =0
Fci= Fqi  1   
  90   

2
   
Fci= Fqi  1   
  90   
For ( >0°)
2
   
Fi  1     (= 0 if  > )
    

Prof J Yang 19
 Meyerhof Bearing Capacity
Factors

N q  e  tan 
tan 2
( 45   / 2 )

N q  1
N c 
tan 

N   (N q  1) tan( 1 .4  )
or
N γ = 1 .5 (N q -1 )tan 

1000 1000 1000

Terzaghi Terzaghi
Terzaghi
100 100 100
Bearing Capacity Factor, Nc

Bearing Capacity Factor, Nq

Bearing Capacity Factor, N

10 10 10

Meyerhof

1 1 1
Meyerhof

Meyerhof

0.1 0.1 0.1

0.01 0.01 0.01

0 10 20 30 40 50 0 10 20 30 40 50 0 10 20 30 40 50
Friction Angle , degrees Friction Angle , degrees Friction Angle , degrees

Prof J Yang 20