Bearing Capacity of

Shallow Foundations

Advanced Soil Mechanics II

Spring 2014

1
Introduction
 Two conditions should be satisfied in foundation
design:
1. Safety against shear failure (strength)
2. Settlements within tolerable limits (serviceability)

 Define:
1. Ultimate bearing capacity (qult):
Equals load per unit area of foundation at which shear failure
in soil occurs
2. Allowable bearing capacity (qall):
qall = qult/FS
FS to account for uncertainty in:
a) Soil properties
b) Method of analysis

Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

2
Example: Failure

Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

3
Example: Failure

Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

4
Example: Failure

Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

5
Bearing Capacity Failure Modes
 Experimental Tests on strip foundation:
1. General shear failure:

 Dense sand, stiff clay

 Sudden failure (at peak)

 Failure surface extends to ground

surface

 qult: probably governed by shear failure

Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

6
Bearing Capacity Failure Modes
 Experimental Tests on strip foundation:
2. Local shear failure:

 Medium dense sand, medium stiff clay

 Considerable amount of settlement is

required for failure surface to extend to
ground surface

 qult: is smaller of:

 q that causes shear failure (no peak)

 q that corresponds to maximum tolerable

settlement
Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

7
Bearing Capacity Failure Modes
 Experimental Tests on strip foundation:
3. Punching shear failure:

 Loose soils

 Failure surface doesn’t extend to

ground surface

 qult: probably governed by maximum

tolerable settlement

Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

8
Development of Simplified B/C Equation

 Wedge “bga” displaces downwards into the ground lateral

pressure is developed along “ag” tends to translate “agf”
horizontally against “afe”.
 Wedge “bga” = active zone  = 45+/2
Wedge “afe” = passive zone  = 45-/2
Wedge “agf” = transitional zone
Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

9
Development of Simplified B/C Equation

 Pressure along “af” = 1 = passive lateral pressure, where:

 1  (q  z )k p  2c k p
 Force Pp = passive lateral force, where:
H
H 2
Pp    1dz  k p  qHk p  2cH k p
0
2
Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

10
Development of Simplified B/C Equation

 To find qult, study equilibrium of wedge “bga”:

Fv = 0 for “adg” (symmetric)
B 1 B
qult     H    cA cos   Pp ,v  0
2 2 2

Footing Wedge Cohesion Lateral

pressure weight pressure

Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

11
Development of Simplified B/C Equation

B 1 B
   H    cA cos   Pp ,v  0
qult 
2 2 2
 Substitute with:
A = ga = (B/2)/cos H = (B/2)tan
 = 45 + /2  = 45 - /2
ka = tan2(45 - /2) kp = tan2(45 + /2)
Pp,v = Pp ÷ cos ÷ cos x cos = Pp/cos
Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

12
Development of Simplified B/C Equation

 Therefore:
 2k p  k p k p B  k p2 
qult  c   kp   q    kp 
 cos   cos  4  cos  
Nc Nq N
 qult = cNc + qNq + BN (Bowles, 96)
c-term q-term -term
Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

13
Development of Simplified B/C Equation
 Draw downs of simplified B/C equation:

 qult is underestimated not used for design

 Shape of zone “agfe” poorly defines the resisting wedge logarithmic
spiral from “g” to “f” and partly along “f” to “e”
 Strip footing only needs shape factor
 Shear resistance from point “e” to ground surface is neglected
 Vertical load only needs inclination factor
Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

14
Bearing Capacity Equations
1. Terzaghi’s B/C equation

2. Meyerhof’s B/C equation

3. Hansen’s B/C equation

4. Vesic’s B/C equation

Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

15
Terzaghi’s B/C Equation

 qult = cNcsc + qNq + 0.5BNs

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

N c  ( N q  1) cot  Strip Round Square

sc 1 1.3 1.3
tan  k p
N  (  1) s 1 0.6 0.8
2 cos 2 
Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

16
Terzaghi’s B/C Equation
 Notes:
 Shape factors in c and  terms only
 Fv in “abc” qult
 =
 Logarithmic spiral “ad”
 Neglects shear resistance from point e to ground surface
Terzaghi limited the use of the above equation for D < B
 Terzaghi never explained very well how he obtained kp used
to calculate N, but provided  versus N for 3  values:
 (degrees) 0 34 48
N 0 36 780.1

 Bowles (1996) used the above table and back-calculated

values for kp values of N for other values of 
Table 4-2 (Bowles, 96)
Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

17
Terzaghi’s B/C Equation
 Notes:

 Other approximations for N are:

 N = 2(Nq+1)tan (Vesic, 1973)
 N = 1.1(Nq-1)tan(1.3) (Spangler and Handy, 1982)

Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

18
Meyerhof’s B/C Equation

 For vertical load: qult = cNcscdc + qNqsqdq + 0.5BNsd

 For inclined load: qult = cNcdcic + qNqdqiq + 0.5BNdi
N q  e tan  tan 2 (45   / 2)
N c  ( N q  1) cot 
N   ( N q  1) tan(1.4 )
 Table 4-3 (Bowles, 1996) for shape, depth, and inclination
factors.
Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

19
Meyerhof’s B/C Equation

 May combine shape, depth, and inclination factors in

Meyerhof’s B/C equation
Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

20
Meyerhof’s B/C Equation
 Notes:

 Shape factors in c, q, and  terms

 Introduced depth and inclination factors
  = 
 Failure along arc “ ad’” (trials)
 Considers shear resistance above foundation level
 Meyerhof’s qult is not greatly different from Terzaghi’s qult up to D ~ B.

Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

21
Hansen’s B/C Equation

 Assumed same failure wedges assumed by Terzaghi

 qult = cNcscdcicgcbc + qNqsqdqiqgqbq + 0.5BNsdigb
Nq and Nc same as Meyerhof
N = 1.5(Nq-1)tan
 For  = 0:
qult = 5.14c(1+ sc’ + dc’ – ic’ – gc’ – bc’) + q
 Table 4-5a and 4-5b (Bowles, 1996) for shape, depth,
inclination, ground, and base factors.
Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

22
Hansen’s B/C Equation

Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

23
Hansen’s B/C Equation



Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

24
Hansen’s B/C Equation
 Notes:
 Introduced ground factors (gi) for inclined ground surface
 Introduced base factors (bi) for inclined foundation level
  = 
 Neglects shear resistance above foundation level
 Can be implemented for any D/B (shallow and deep
foundations)
 For inclined foundation level, vertical and horizontal forces
are taken perpendicular and parallel to foundation level,
respectively
 Can be used to estimate B/C for footings on slopes (later)

Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

25
Vesic’s B/C Equation
 Same as Hansen’s B/C equation with few changes:
 Slightly different N
 N = 2(Nq+1)tan
 Differences in inclination, ground, and base factors Table 4-5c
(Bowles, 1996)

Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

26
Vesic’s B/C Equation



Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

27
General Notes
 Nc and Nq are the same for Meyerhof, Hansen, and Vesic.
Differences only in N. Table 4-4 (Bowles, 1996) for N
factors for all 3 methods

 Methods used to develop B/C equations do not satisfy

moment equilibrium, only Fh=0 and Fv=0.
Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

28
General Notes
Which equation shall we use?
 Terzaghi’s B/C equation:
 Cohesive soils: D/B < 1
 Quick estimate of qult to compare with other methods.
 Do not use for footings with moments and/or horizontal
forces, tilted foundation level, or sloping ground surface.
 Meyerhof’s B/C equation:
 Do not use for footings with tilted foundation level or
sloping ground surface.

Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

29
General Notes
Which equation shall we use?
 Hansen and Vesic’s B/C equations:
 Can be used for D/B > 1
 Can be used for footings with moments and/or horizontal
forces, tilted foundation level, or sloping ground surface.
 It is a good practice to check more than one method and
compare results.
 Hansen and Vesic’s B/C equations are considered the
“General B/C Equations”.

Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

30
Example 1
Compute qall using Simplified and Terzaghi’s B/C
equations. Use FS = 3.0. GS
=17.3kN/m3
D=1.2m
=20o
1. Simplified B/C equation: c=20kPa
B

 2k p  k p k p B  k p2 
qult  c   kp   q    kp 
 cos   cos  4  cos  
Nc Nq N
kp =tan2(45 + /2)
For =20o, get Nc=5.8, Nq=3.1, N=0.75
Substitute in B/C equation given =17.3kN/m3, c=20kPa
qult = 20(5.8)+1.2(17.3)(3.1)+17.3B(0.75)
= 180+13B kPa
qall = qult/FS = 60+4.3B kPa (FS = 3)
Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

31
Example 1
Compute qall using Simplified and Terzaghi’s B/C
equations. Use FS = 3.0. GS
=17.3kN/m3
D=1.2m
=20o
2. Terzaghi’s B/C equation: c=20kPa
B
qult = cNcsc + qNq + 0.5BNs
Table 4.2, =20o get Nc=17.7, Nq=7.4, N=5
Assume square footing, sc=1.3, s=0.8
Therefore:
qult = 20(17.7)(1.3)+1.2(17.3)(7.4)+0.5(17.3)(B)(5)(0.8)
= 613.8+34.6B kPa
qall = qult/FS = 205+11.5B kPa (FS = 3)
Compare: Terzaghi’s qall is about 3 times that calculated using
Simplified B/C equation. Simplified B/C equation is too
conservative (underestimates B/C), not used for design.
Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

32
Example 2
A footing load test was conducted with: D=0.5m, B=0.5m,
L=2m, ’=9.31kN/m3, TX=42.5o, c=0. The measured
Pult=1863kN. Compute qult using Hansen and Meyerhof B/C
equations and compare with measured value.

Notes:
 Measured qult = Pult/BL = 1863/(0.5x2)=1863kPa
 c=0, c-term disappears.
 For L/B >2, use PS = 1.5(TX)-17

Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

33
Example 2
1. Hansen’s B/C equation:
qult = qNqsqdqiqgqbq + 0.5BNsdigb
Horizontal ground surface, gi=1.0
Horizontal foundation level, bi=1.0
Vertical loading, ii=1.0
L/B=2/0.5=4>2, PS=1.5(TX)-17=47o
N q  e tan  tan 2 (45   / 2) 
N = 1.5(Nq-1)tan 
From Table 4-5a:
sq=1+(B/L)sin=1.18
s=1-0.4B/L=0.9 (>0.6)
dq=1+2tan(1-sin)2k=1.155, where k=D/B for D<B
d=1.0

Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

34
Example 2
1. Hansen’s B/C equation:
qult = qNqsqdqiqgqbq + 0.5BNsdigb
qult=9.31(0.5)(187)(1.18)(1.155)+0.5(9.31)(0.5)(299)(0.9)(1)
=1812 kPa versus 1863 (measured) within 3%
2. Meyerhof’s B/C equation:
qult = qNqsqdqiq + 0.5BNsdi
Vertical loading, ii=1.0
Use PS=47o, Nq=187
N   ( N q  1) tan(1.4 ) = 414
From Table 4-3:
sq=s=1+0.1kpB/L = 1.16,
where kp = tan2(45 + /2)=6.44
D
d q  d   1  0.1 k p  1.25
B
Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

35
Example 2
2. Meyerhof’s B/C equation:
qult = qNqsqdqiq + 0.5BNsdi
qult=9.31(0.5)(187)(1.16)(1.25)+0.5(9.31)(0.5)(414)(1.16)(1.25)
=2659kPa versus 1863 (measured) overestimated by
40%

Remember: main difference between Meyerhof and Hansen

solutions is N.

Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

36
Footings with Eccentricity
 Two Cases:
N
 Case 1 (shown): concentric column
with axial load and moments Mx My
GS
 Case 2: eccentric column with axial
load
 General practice in design of x
Mx
footings:
ex
1. ex = Mx/N < L/6 My
ey
2. ey = My/N < B/6 B
y
 Analyzed using either:
 Method 1: using Meyerhof B/C L
equation
 Method 2: using Hansen or Vesic
B/C equations

Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

37
Footings with Eccentricity
 Method 1:
 Meyerhof introduced reduction factor “Re”, to be used
with Meyerhof’s B/C equation:
 If eccentricity in one direction (ex or ey):
qult,design = qult,B/C equation x Re
where Re = 1-2e/B (cohesive soil)
= 1-(e/B)0.5 (cohesionless soil, 0<e/B<0.3)
 If eccentricity in 2 directions (ex and ey):
qult,design = qult,B/C equation x Rex x Rey

 qall = qult,design/F.S.
 Pall = qall x B x L

Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

38
Footings with Eccentricity
 Method 2:
 Calculate effective (reduced) footing dimensions:
L’ = L - 2ex
B’ = B - 2ey
Af = L’ x B’
 Apply reduced dimensions to Hansen and Vesic B/C equations:
1. Use B’ in -term
2. Use B’ and L’ in shape factors
3. Use B and L in depth factors
 Note that the area Af is uniformly loaded

 qall = qult/F.S.
 Pall = qall x B’ x L’

Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

39
Footings with Inclined Loads
V
 Examples: wind, lateral earth
pressure in retaining walls, industrial GS
HB
foundations, …. HL

 Components of inclined load: “V” x

and “HB” and/or “HL” HB

 Results in reduction in B/C HL

B
y
 Accounted for in Meyerhof, Hansen,
and Vesic inclination factors L
(Tables 4-3 and 4-5)

Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

40
Footings with Inclined Loads
V
 Notes:
GS
HB
 Inclination factors (used to
HL
calculate B/C) are function of “V”
and “H” components of inclined x

load HB

 qall to be compared with “V” B

HL
y
(perpendicular to base)

 Remember: H parallel to base, V L

perpendicular to base

Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

41
Footings with Inclined Loads
V
 Footing should be checked
GS
against sliding due to “H”:
HL PP
 Sliding force: = HB or HL
V tan + caB’L’
 Resisting forces:

 Vtan + caB’L’

 Passive force (Pp) (may

ignore)

 Factor of safety against sliding:

resisting force V tan   ca B ' L'
F .S .sliding  
sliding force H B or H L

Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

42
Example
 Footing: 2 x 2 m
 Soil:  = 17.5 kN/m3 V
HB
 = 25o D=0.3m
c = 25 kPa =10o
 Loads: V = 600 kN
HB = 200 kN
 Are footing dimensions adequate for FS = 3? Use Vesic’s
method (Note: Ignore eccentricity due to HB).
 Solution:
 = 25o Table 4-4: Nc = 20.71, Nq = 10.7, N = 10.9
 Shape factors:
sc = 1+(Nq/Nc)(B/L) = 1+(10.7/20.71)(2/2) = 1.52
sq = 1+(B/L)tan = 1+(2/2)tan25 = 1.47
s = 1-0.4(B/L) = 1-0.4(2/2) = 0.6 > 0.6 OK

Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

43
Example
 Depth factors: V
HB
dc = 1+0.4(D/B) = 1.06 D=0.3m
dq = 1+2tan(1-sin)2(D/B) = 1.05 =10o
d = 1.0
 Inclination factors:
m = mB = (2+B/L)/(1+B/L) = 3/2 = 1.5 (mL = 0)
m
 H 
iq  1   assume ca = c
 V  A c
f a cot  
1.5 1.5
 200   200 
iq  1    1  814.5   0.655
 600  2  2  25 cot 25   
ic = iq-(1-iq)/(Nq-1) = 0.655-(1-0.655)/(10.7-1)=0.619
m 1
 H  200 2.5
i  1    (1  )  0.494
 V  A c
f a cot   814.5

Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

44
Example
V
HB
D=0.3m

=10o

 Base factors:
bc = 1-(2)/(5.14tan)=1.0 (=0, horizontal GS)
b = bq = (1-tan)2 = (1 – [10xπ/180 tan25])2 = 0.844
 Ground factors:
gc = gq = g = 1.0 (=0, horizontal GS)

qult = cNcscdcicbcgc + qNqsqdqiqbqgq + 0.5BNsdib

 = 516.37 + 47.93 + 47.72 = 612 kPa
 qall = qult/FS = 612/3 = 204 kPa
 Pall = qall x A = 204 x 2 x 2 = 816 kN > V (600 kN) “OK”
Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

45
Example
 Check of sliding:
 Sliding force = HB = 200 kN
 Resisting force = Vtan + caBL, assume = 
= 600 tan25 + 25 x 2 x 2 = 379.8 kN
 FSagainst sliding = 379.8/200 = 1.9 “OK”
 Note: Ignored passive resistance

V
HB
D=0.3m

=10o

Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

46
Effect of Soil Rigidity
 B/C equations were developed for general shear failure
and for rigid-plastic soil such as dense sand and stiff clay.
 For rigid-plastic soils:
B
Ir > Irc GS
where Ir = soil rigidity index = G/(c+qtan)
Df
G = soil shear modulus = E/2(1+)
E = Young’s modulus
 = Poisson’s ratio
q = effective overburden pressure at depth: Df+B/2
Irc = critical rigidity index of soil
= 0.5{exp[(3.3-0.45B/L)cot(45-/2)]}

Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

47
Effect of Soil Rigidity
 If Ir < Irc, B/C decreases
qult = c-term x Fcr + q-term x Fqr + -term x Fr
where:
Fr = Fqr= exp{(-4.4+0.6B/L)tan+[(3.07sin)(log2Ir)/(1+sin)]}

For  = 0:
Fcr = 0.32 + 0.12B/L + 0.6 logIr
For  > 0:
Fcr = Fqr – (1-Fqr)/(Nqtan)

Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

48
Effect of Groundwater Table
 qult = cNc…. + qNq…. + 0.5BN…. B
where: GS
q: effective overburden pressure from GS to
foundation level
 in -term: for soil underneath footing, dw 45+/2
depends on dw with respect to H (influence H
zone)
dw: depth of GWT below foundation level
H = 0.5Btan(45+/2)
wet : unit weight above GWT
’ : unit weight below GWT

if dw = 0,  = ’
if dw>H,  = wet
if 0<dw<H,  = wetdw/H + ’(H-dw)/H

Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

49
B/C for Footings on Layered Soils
 Critical case when stronger soil overlies weaker soil, or if
it is difficult to judge which layer is weaker.
 Several possible modes of failure: B
GS
 Case 1:
Case 1
General shear failure in Soil I d1 I
Soil II not involved
Probably d1 >> H = 0.5Btan(45+/2) II
B
GS
 Case 2: I
Punching shear failure in Soil I d1
Case 2
General shear failure in Soil II
Probably d1 << H = 0.5Btan(45+/2) II
B
 Case 3: GS

General shear failure in Soils I and II

I
Case 3 II

Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

50
B/C for Footings on Layered Soils
 Remember: Influence zone = H = 0.5Btan(45+/2)
 Three approaches to evaluate B/C for footings on layered
soils.
 Approach I: case 3 B
GS
Applies when 2 or more soil layers
of same nature exist within
H d1 I
influence zone (example: 2 (c-) d2
II
soils)
1. Calculate weighted averages for soil parameters within the
influence zone “H”
cavg = (d1c1+d2c2)/(d1+d2) : d1+d2 = H
tanavg = (d1tan1+d2tan2)/(d1+d2)
avg=(d11+d22)/(d1+d2)
where d1 and d2 are the thicknesses of the 2 soil layers
within the influence zone
2. Calculate qult using average values
Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

51
B/C for Footings on Layered Soils
 Approach II: case 2 (punching shear failure)
Applies mainly when stronger soil overlies weaker soil
(ex: sand overlying clay)
1. Calculate B/C of top layer qult1
2. Calculate B/C of lower layer considering punching resistance
of top layer qult2’
friction B
cohesion
GS
pP tan  pd1c
q'
ult 2  qult 2  h 
A A Punching D q
resistance a b
qult2 = B/C of lower layer (using footing
width B, c and  for lower layer, q = D) d1 I

A = area of footing a’ b’
p = perimeter for punching [2(B+L) if II
rectangular]
Ph = total horizontal force per unit
length of faces aa’ and bb’
Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

52
B/C for Footings on Layered Soils
B
d1 d1
GS
Ph    h dh    v kdh
0 0
D q
d1
a b
Ph   (q  h)kdh
0 d1 I
h 2
Ph  k[qh  ] d1
0 a’ b’
2
II
d12
Ph  k[qd1  ]
2
where:
q = D
k = lateral earth pressure coefficient: ko<k<kp
c, = shear strength parameters of top layer
3. qult is smaller of qult1 and qult2’

Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

53
B/C for Footings on Layered Soils
 Approach III: Approximate 2:1 method
approved by Egyptian Code
1. Calculate B/C of top layer qult1
2. Calculate qult2 on top of lower layer using
B’ and L’, where:
BxL
B’ = B + d1 GS
L’ = L + d1
3. Translate qult2 from top of lower layer to
foundation level: d1 I

2:
2:

1
B’ x L’
qult2,FL = qult2 x (B+d1)(L+d1)/BL
4. qult is smaller of qult1 and qult2,FL II

Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

54
Closely spaced foundations
 Four cases (Figures 4.10 and 4.11 “Das, 2007”)
for rough continuous foundations in granular
soils (c = 0):
 Case 1: x = x1, no overlap

Note: 1 = ’, 2 = 45-’/2

qult = qNq + 0.5BN

Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

55
Closely spaced foundations
 Case 2: x = x2 < x1, passive zones just overlap
(coincide)

Note: 1 = ’, 2 = 45-’/2

qult = qNq + 0.5BN

Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

56
Closely spaced foundations
 Cases 3: x = x3 < x2, size of passive zone is reduced,
shapes of all zones vary, B/C

Note: 2 = 45-’/2, 3 = 180-2’

qult = qNqq + 0.5BN

where, q and  > 1, f(x/B)

Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

57
Closely spaced foundations
 Case 4: x = x4 < x3, blocking occurs, and 2
foundations act as one of width = 2B

qult = qNqq + 0.5BN

where, q and  > 1, f(x/B)

Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

58
Closely spaced foundations
 Cases 3 and 4:
qult = qNqq + 0.5BN
where, q and  > 1, f(x/B and )

Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

59
B/C of footings on slopes
 Footing “on” or “near” a slope

“On slope” +

“Near slope”
-

 Lack of soil on slope side reduces B/C

 For footing “on slope”: can use ground factors “g” with
Hansen or Vesic, or may solve as footing “near slope”
Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

60
B/C of footings on slopes
 For footing “near slope”: reduced Nc, Nq, and N
Nc’, Nq’, N’:
h g

f
e c

a
d
“With slope”
“Without slope”

 Nc’ = Nc x L1/Lo, where:

L1 = length of arc “ade” with slope
Lo = length of arc “ade” without slope Table 4-7
 Nq’ = Nq x A1/Ao, where: (Bowles, 1996)
A1 = area “efgh” with slope
Ao = area “efgh” without slope

Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

61
B/C of footings on slopes
 Table 4-7:

Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

62
B/C of footings on slopes
 Table 4-7 (cont’d):

Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

63
B/C of footings on slopes
N 
1  R 
N b
 N '    R 
2 2  2B 
Contribution of Contribution
no slope side of slope side

R=kmin/kmax
where k = Coulomb’s passive earth pressure coefficient
sin 2 (   )
kp  2
 sin(   ) sin(   ) 
sin 2  sin(   ) 1  
 sin(   ) sin(   ) 
kmin: corresponds to –
kmax: corresponds to +“on slope” or =0 “near slope”
 = 90o
=

 Note: use depth factors = 1.0 (already taken into consideration)

Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

64
B/C of footings subject to uplift or tension
forces

 Failure mode probable pullout zone shear

along its surface area “ab” simplified to vertical
surface area “ ab’ ”.
 Pullout force: Tu
 Resisting forces:
1. Weight (base and soil above base)
Friction f()
2. Shear resistance along vertical sides Cohesion f(c)
Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

65
B/C of footings subject to uplift or tension
forces

 Footings may behave as shallow or deep

 Deep footings limiting value on shear resistance
developed along pullout zone (H not D)

Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

66
B/C of footings subject to uplift or tension
forces
 Shallow or Deep?
 Knowing “” Table get limiting H/B

 If D/B < limiting H/B Shallow

If D/B > limiting H/B Deep

Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

67
B/C of footings subject to uplift or tension
forces

D
 Tu  pDc  p  ku v tan  dh  W Shallow
0
H
 Tu  pHc  p  ku v tan  dh  W Deep
0
cohesion weights
friction

where p = pullout perimeter

ku = lateral earth pressure coefficient

Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

68
B/C of footings subject to uplift or tension
forces
 For shallow footings:
 Round base: 2
D
Tu  BDc  s f B ku tan   W
2
 Rectangular base:
Tu  2( B  L) Dc  D 2 (2s f B  L  B)ku tan   W
where:
sf = side friction adjustment factor (>1)
= 1 + mD/B < sf,max (m & sf,max = f())

Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

69
B/C of footings subject to uplift or tension
forces
 For deep footings:
 Round base:
H
Tu  BHc  s f B (2 D  H )( )ku tan   W
2
 Rectangular base:
Tu  2( B  L) Hc   (2 D  H )(2s f B  L  B) Hku tan   W
where:
sf = side friction adjustment factor (>1)
= 1 + mH/B < sf,max (m & sf,max = f())

Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

70
B/C of footings subject to uplift or tension
forces
 ku: Lateral earth pressure coefficient
 ranges from ka to kp
 can be calculated as follows:
ku = kp tan2(45+/2)
ku = kp0.5
Might consider an
ku = ka = tan2(45-/2) average value
ku = ko = 1-sin
ku = 0.65 + 0.5 ( in radians)

Dr. Manal A. Salem – Advanced Soil Mechanics II – Bearing Capacity

71