Chapter Three

Bearing Capacity of Soils

 Bearing Capacity

*A foundation is required for distributing

the loads of the superstructure on a
large area.
* The foundation should be
designed such that
a) The soil below does not fail in shear
b) Settlement is within the safe limits.
 Basic Definitions :

1) Ultimate Bearing Capacity (qu) :

The ultimate bearing capacity is the gross
pressure at the base of the foundation at
which soil fails in shear.

2) Net ultimate Bearing Capacity (qnu) :

It is the net increase in pressure at the
base of foundation that cause shear failure
of the soil.

Thus, qnu = qu – γDf (ovrbruden pressure)

 3) Net Safe Bearing Capacity (qns) :
It is the net soil pressure which can be
safely applied to the soil considering only shear
failure.
Thus, qns = qnu /FOS

FOS - Factor of safety usually taken as 2.00 -3.00

4) Gross Safe Bearing Capacity (qs) :

It is the maximum pressure which the soil can
carry safely without shear failure.
qs = qnu / FOS + γ Df
5)Net Safe Settlement Pressure (qnp) :
It is the net pressure which the soil can
carry without exceeding allowable
settlement.

6)Net Allowable Bearing Pressure (qna ): It

is the net bearing pressure which can be
used for design of foundation.
Thus,
qna = qns ; if qnp > qns
qna = qnp ; if qns > qnp

It is also known as Allowable Soil Pressure

(ASP).
 Bearing capacity - vertical load only
 Where the soil in zones I, II and III is in a state of plastic equilibrium.
The active Rankine zone I is pushed downwards and, in turn, pushes
the radial shear zones II sideways and the passive Rankine zones III
sideways and upwards.
 At failure, the movement of these masses is mobilizing the full shear
strength of the soil, which is obtained from the Mohr-Coulomb
shear strength parameters c and Ø and the total or effective
stresses in the soil.
 These stresses are provided by the self weight of the soil (due to
gravity) and from the surcharge pressure around the foundation
(due to stress distribution).
 Modes of shear Failure :
 Vesic (1973) classified shear failure of soil under a foundation
base into three categories depending on the type of soil &
location of foundation.
 Failure is defined as mobilizing the full value of shear
strength of the soil accompanied by large and excessive settlements.
 The mechanism causing failure for shallow foundations depends
on the soil type, particularly its compressibility, and the type of
loading.
Mode of shear Failure
 General , Local , Punching
 General Shear Failure
If the soil is incompressible then volume reductions
are not possible.
Vertical displacements of the foundation can only be produced by
mass movements with shear distortion occurring along a slip surface .
 General Shear Failure
This type of failure is seen in dense and stiff soil.
Characteristics of general shear failure:
 Continuous, well defined and distinct failure surface develops
•
between the edge of footing and ground surface.

 Dense or stiff soil that undergoes low compressibility experiences

this failure.
 Continuous bulging of shear mass adjacent to footing is
visible.
 Failure is accompanied by tilting of footing.
 General Shear Failure
 Failure is sudden and catastrophic with pronounced peak in P –
Δ curve.
 The length of disturbance beyond the edge of footing is large.
 State of plastic equilibrium is reached initially at the footing
edge and spreads gradually downwards and outwards.
 General shear failure is accompanied by low strain (<5%) in a
soil with considerable Φ (Φ>360 ) and large N (N > 30)
having high relative density (ID > 70%), e < 0.55.
 Local Shear Failure
The local shear mode is a transition between general and punching
shear failure.
This type of failure is seen in relatively loose and soft soil.
Characteristics of Local shear failure.

 A significant compression of soil below the footing and partial

development of plastic equilibrium is observed.

 Failure is not sudden and there is no tilting of footing.

 Failure surface does not reach the ground surface and slight
bulging of soil around the footing is observed.

 Failure surface is not well defined.

 Local Shear Failure
 Failure is characterized by considerable settlement.
 Well defined peak is absent in P – Δ curve.
 Local shear failure is accompanied by large strain (>10 to 20%) in a
soil with considerably low Φ (Φ<280 ) and low N (N < 5) having low
relative density(ID > 20%), e > 0.75.
 Punching Share failure
 If the soil is compressible, vertical displacements of the foundation
are produced by volume reductions throughout the soil generally
with limited shear distortion .

 The loaded base sinks into soil like a punch.

 The failure surface do not extend up to the ground surface.
 No heave is observed.
 Large vertical strains are involved with practically no lateral deformation.
 Failure planes are difficult to locate
 Punching Shear Failure
This type of failure is seen in loose and soft soil and at deeper
elevations.

Characteristics of Punching shear failure.

 This type of failure occurs in a soil of very high compressibility.
 Failure pattern is not observed.
 Bulging of soil around the footing is absent.
 Failure is characterized by very large settlement.

 Continuous settlement with no increase in P is observed in P – Δ

curve.
Characteristics Soil Types
 failure in foundation soil P – Δ curve in different
foundation soils
Footing on ground that experiences a) General shear failure,
b) Local shear failure and c) Punching shear failure

Different failure modes in sandy soil carrying circular footing

based on the contributions from Vesic (1963 & 1973)
 Prandtl’s Theory for Bearing Capacity

Prandtl analyzed the plastic failure in

metals when punched by hard metal
punchers (Prandtl, 1920).
This analysis has been adapted to soil
when loaded to shear failure by a relatively
rigid foundation (Prandtl, 1921).
 Assumptions Cont.…..

No sliding occurs between foundation and soil (rough

foundation)
The shear strength of soil is represented by Mohr
Coulombs Criteria.
The footing is of strip footing type with rough base.
 It is essentially a two dimensional plane strain problem
 Effect of water table is neglected
 Assumptions
 Elastic zone has straight boundaries inclined at an angle equal to
Φ to the horizontal.
 Failure zone is not extended above, beyond the base of the
footing.
 Passive pressure force has three components (qC produced by
cohesion, qq produced by surcharge and qγ produced by weight
of shear zone).
 Footing carries concentric and vertical loads.
 Footing and ground are horizontal.
 Assumptions contd..

 Limit equilibrium is reached simultaneously at all points.

 Complete shear failure is mobilized at all points at the same time.
 The properties of foundation soil do not change during the shear
failure
 No soil consolidation occurs
 Foundation is very rigid relative to the soil.
 Limitations of Assumptions
 The theory is applicable to shallow foundations
 As the soil compresses, Φ increases which is not considered.
Hence fully plastic zone may not develop at the assumed Φ.
 All points need not experience limit equilibrium condition at
different loads.
 Method of superstition is not acceptable in plastic conditions as
the ground is near failure zone
Failure Geometry for Terzaghi's Method

19
*The failure zones do not extend above the horizontal
plane passing through base of footing.

 The failure occurs when the down ward pressure exerted by

loads on the soil adjoining the inclined surfaces on soil wedge is
equal to upward pressure.
 Downward forces are due to the load (= qu×b)
 The weight of soil wedge is (1/4 γb2 tanø)
 Upward forces are the vertical components of resultant passive
pressure (Pp) & the cohesion (c’) acting along the inclined
surfaces.
TERZAGHI’S BEARING CAPACITY EQUATIONS

Terzaghi used an approximate method to determine the ultimate

bearing capacity, qu.
The principles of this approximation are the following.

.See next slide

 TERZAGHI’S BEARING CAPACITY EQUATIONS Cont.…..

By the method of superimposition, when the effects of the unit

weight of soil, cohesion, and surcharge are considered, we have

The above equations is referred to as Terzaghi’s bearing-capacity

equation.
The values of these factors are given in the Table from next slide
Table 16.1 Braja. [Link] .
For an undrained condition with Ø = 0 and f = cu, the bearing-
capacity factors are N = 0 and Nq = 1.
Also, Nc 5.7. In that case .
The Ultimate bearing capacity equations reduced in the following
forms
 Important points :

* Terzaghi’s Bearing Capacity equation is applicable for general

shear failure.
* Terzaghi has suggested following empirical reduction to actual
c & ø in case of local shear failure
Mobilised cohesion Cm = 2/3 C
Mobilised angle of øm = tan –1 (⅔tanø)
Thus, Nc’, Nq’ & Nr’ are B.C. factors for local shear failure
qu = CmNc’+ γ Df Nq’+ 0.5 γ B Nr’
Hansen’s Bearing Capacity Equation ( General Equation )

Hansen (1961) extended Meyerhof’s solutions by considering

the effects of sloping ground surface and tilted base Fig.
below as well as modification of Nγ and other factors.
The General Bearing Capacity Equation.
The General Bearing Capacity Equation.
Other Factors
 Meyerhof’s Method
The important difference between Terzaghi’s and Meyerhof’s approaches is that the latter
considers the shearing resistance of the soil above the base of the foundation, while the
former ignores it.
Thus, Meyerhof allows the failure zones to extend up to the ground surface (Meyerhof,
1951).
EFFECT OF WATER TABLE ON BEARING
CAPACITY OF THE SOIL
INTRODUCTION
 The position of ground water has a significant effect on the bearing
capacity of soil.
 Presence of water table at a depth less than the width of the
foundation from the foundation bottom will reduce the bearing
capacity of the soil.
 Lesser the depth, harder it is to build a strong foundation as the
soil will have low bearing capacity. As speaking of bearing capacity,
it is the maximum stress which a particular soil can withstand
without failing
 Effect of Water Table Cont.…

 The change in moisture content of the soil affects the properties of

the soil. Similarly, if soil gets submerged its ability to support the load
coming over its unit area is reduced when the water table is above
the base of the footing.
 the submerged weight is used for the soil below the water table for
computing the surcharge.
 The water table corrections are applied to determine the ultimate
bearing capacity of the soil
 Effect of Water Table Cont.…
The bearing capacity equation incorporating the ground water table
correction factors is given below
Effect of Ground Water on Bearing capacity of Soils
Case I (Figure .a) If the groundwater table is located at a distance D above
the bottom of the foundation, the magnitude of q in the the bearing-
capacity equation should be calculated as

Case II (Figure b) If the groundwater table coincides with the bottom of the
foundation, the magnitude of q is equal to Df.
However, the unit weight, Y , in term of the bearing-capacity equations
should be replaced by Y’
Case III (Figure 16.6c) When the groundwater table is at a depth D below the
bottom of the foundation, q = Y Df.
The magnitude of Y in the bearing-capacity equations should be replaced by
Yav.
FACTORS INFLUENCING BEARING Capacity
 Type of soil
 Unit weight of soil
 Surcharge load
 Depth of foundation
 Mode of failure
 Size of footing
 Shape of footing
 Depth of water table
 Eccentricity in footing load
 Inclination of footing load
Inclination of ground
 Inclination of base of foundation
 DETERMINATION OF BEARING CAPACITY
FROM FIELD TESTS
Field Tests are performed in the field.
The biggest advantages are that there is no need to extract soil
sample and the conditions during testing are identical to the
actual situation.
Major advantages of field tests are
 Sampling not required
 Minimum Soil disturbance
Major disadvantages of field tests are
 Laborious
 Time consuming
 Heavy equipment to be carried to field
 Short duration behavior
 Plate Loading Test
 The standard method for a field-load test is given by the
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) under
Designation D-1194 (ASTM, 1997).

 Circular steel bearing plates 162 to 760 mm in diameter and

305 mm X 305 mm square plates are used for this type of test.
 Plate Loading Test Conti
To conduct the test
 one must have a pit of depth Df excavated.
 The width of the test pit should be at least four times the
 width of the bearing plate to be used for the test.
 The bearing plate is placed on the soil at the bottom of the pit, and
an incremental load on the bearing plate is applied.
 After the application of an incremental load, enough time is allowed
for settlement to occur. When the settlement of the bearing plate
becomes negligible, another incremental load is applied.
 In this manner, a load-settlement plot can be obtained, as shown in
Figure (next slide)
 Plate Loading Test

Typical load-settlement curve obtained from

Diagram of plate-load test plate-load test
 Plate Load Test Conti…...
From the results of field load tests, the ultimate soil-bearing capacity
of actual footings can be approximated as follows:

For a given intensity of load q, the settlement of the actual footing

also can be approximated from the following equations:
Example
Advantage of Plate Load Test
Standard Penetration Test (SPT):
Introduction:
The standard penetration test (SPT) is most commonly used in
cohesion less soils, and In-situ test which can’t be easily sampled.
This test is widely used to obtain the bearing capacity of soil, to
estimate the relative density of soils and approximate shear strength
parameters.
It is a simple and inexpensive test to estimate the relative density of
soils and approximate shear strength parameters.
 Standard Penetration Test (SPT):
 The sampler is attached to drill rods and the dynamic driving force is
a 63.5kg mass falling through a height of 76cm onto the top of the
rods.
 The sampler is initially driven 15cm below the bottom of the
borehole. It is then further driven 30cm.
 The number of blows required to drive the last 30cm is termed as
the standard penetration value denoted by N.
 Standard Penetration Test (SPT):

If the number of blows for 150mm exceeds 50 it is taken as a refusal

and the test is discontinuous.

Standard Penetration Test Tools:

1. Drilling Rig.
2. Split spoon (tube).
3. Drop hammer 65 kg (140 lbs ).
‘doughnut hammer’
4. Driving head (anvil).
5. Guiding rod.
6. Tripod.
7. Extension rods.
Standard Penetration Test tools
 SPT Test Procedure

1. Erect the tripod over the test hole and assemble the unit.
2. Allow the spoon to rest on the bottom of the hole.
3. Drive the spoon with blows from the hammer falling 75 cm (30
inches), until either 45 cm (18 inches) have been penetrated or 100
blows have been applied.
SPT Test Procedure
 SPT Test Procedure
4. Record the number of blows required to effect each 150 mm (6
inches) of penetration. The first 6 inches (300mm) is considered as
seating drive.
5. The number of blows required for the second and third 150 mm (6
inches) of drive added is recorded as the penetration resistance
value N of the soil
 Correction
The N values obtained from SPT are usually corrected for various
effects such as overburden pressure and energy transfer.
The following are two of the most commonly used methods in
practice for correcting the N values.

 No correction for cohesive soils.

 correction for overburden pressure
 correction for dilatancy
CORRECTOIN FOR OVERBURDEN PRESSURE

Correlation between Number of blows (N), Angle of Internal Friction

and Relative Density of Frictional Soils(Terzaghi and Peck).

Correlation between Number of blows (N), Unconfined Compressive

Strength and Consistency of Cohesive Soils. (Terzaghi and Peck).
 Correction Cont.….

where CN is a correction factor for overburden pressure, and ‘ óz0 is

the effective overburden pressure in kPa.
A further correction factor is imposed on N values if the groundwater
level is within a depth B below the base of the footing.
The groundwater correction factor is:

where z is the depth to the groundwater table, and D and B are the
footing depth and width.
 Correction Conti….

If the depth of the groundwater table is beyond B from the footing

base CW = 1.
The corrected N value is:

Meyerhof (1956, 1974) proposed the following equations to

determine the allowable bearing capacity qa from SPT values.

where Se is the elastic settlement of the layer in mm and kd = 1 + 0.33

D/B <=1.33.
 Correction Cont.…

Bowles (1996) modified Meyerhof’s equations by 50% increase in the

allowable bearing capacity. Bowles’s equations are: