Module -5

Bearing Capacity of Shallow

Foundations
 Bearing capacity of Shallow Foundations

• Definition of ultimate, net and safe bearing capacities,

allowable bearing pressure
• Terzaghi bearing capacity equations -- assumptions and
limitations
• IS code bearing capacity equations, bearing capacity of
footings subjected to eccentric loading, effect of ground
water table on bearing capacity
• Field method to evaluate BC – Plate load test, SPT and
CPT.
 Shallow Foundations
• A structural system which can safely transfer loads from superstructure to the
subsoil at shallow depths
• Depth of foundation (Df) is less than width of foundation (B)
• Majority of load is transferred through bearing (base resistance)
• Important design considerations
• Bearing capacity
Ultimate load a soil can take just before complete failure (A good design should
eliminate the possibility of shear failure of supporting soil)
• Settlement
Total settlement below a footing, and
Differential settlement between two footings, must not exceed tolerable limits.
3
Shallow Foundations

4
Types of Footing
• Based on shape:
• Square, circular, rectangular, etc.
• In general, shape of column decides the shape of footing
• Based on load-dispersion:
• Spread footing
• Strip footing or wall footing
• Based on number of columns supported:
• Isolated footing – to support individual columns
• Combined footing – to support a row of columns or Individual footings
combined with a rigid beams called straps
• Mat/Raft foundation – to support more than one row of columns 5
Isolated Footings

6
Combined Footings

7
Raft or Mat Foundation

8
Requirements for a good foundation

• Properly located with respect to any future influence which could

adversely affect its performance.
• Must be stable or safe from failure.
• Must not settle or deflect sufficiently to damage the structure or
impair its usefulness.

9
Design Criteria
• To perform satisfactory, shallow foundation must have two
main criteria:
• They have to be safe against overall shear failure in the soil that
supports them.
(Safety factor usually between 2.5 to 3.0)
• They cannot undergo excessive displacement or settlement.
(Settlement of individual footing on sand 50 mm or 75 mm for
footing on clay)

10
Ultimate Bearing Capacity for Shallow Foundations
Definition:
• Bearing capacity is ability of a soil to bear the loads
transmitted by a footing.
• Ultimate bearing capacity is reach when the impose
foundation pressure is in equilibrium with resisting soil
pressure.
• When the pressure exceed the ultimate soil bearing capacity
value, the foundation pronounced fail in shear.

11
Bearing Capacity -- Definitions

12
Bearing Capacity -- Definitions

13
Bearing Capacity -- Definitions

14
Ultimate Bearing Capacity for Shallow Foundations
• Ultimate Bearing Capacity (qult) is the maximum pressure
which can be carried by the soil immediately below
foundation.
• The theory is developed based on three modes of failure;
a) General shear failures – for soils (dense or hard state)
b) Local shear failures – for soils (medium density or firm state)
c) Punching shear failure – for soils (loose or soft state)

15
 Failure Modes of Shallow Foundations

General Shear Failure

Local Shear Failure

Punching Shear Failure

16
General Shear Failure

17
Local Shear Failure

18
Punching Shear Failure

19
Methods of Bearing Capacity Determination

1. Terzaghi's bearing capacity theory

2. The general bearing capacity equation
3. Field tests

20
Terzaghi’s Bearing Capacity Theory

• Terzaghi made the following assumptions for developing an equation for

determining qu for a c-ɸ soil.
• The soil is semi-infinite, homogeneous and isotropic,
• The problem is two-dimensional,
• The base of the footing is rough,
• The failure is by general shear,
• the load is vertical and symmetrical,
• The ground surface is horizontal,
• The overburden pressure at foundation level is equivalent to a
surcharge load
• The principle of superposition is valid,
• Coulomb's law is strictly valid, that is,
21
Mechanism of Failure

22
Mechanism of Failure

• The failure mechanisms of the soil due to foundation load is

defined in three failure zone:
• Zone 1: The triangular active zone ADC immediately under the
foundation.
• Zone 2: The Radial shear zones of ADF and CDE.
• Zone 3: Two Triangular Rankine Passive zones AFH and CEG
• Note: The weight of the foundation and the soil in zone 1 will pushed
zone 2 to the sides AND zone 3 to the surface of the soil resulting in
the bulge of the soil surface.

23
Mechanism of Failure

• Terzaghi’s assumption:
• The angles CAD and ACD is equal to the soil friction angle, Φ.
(that is, α = Φ)
• By replacing the weight of the soil above the foundation base by an
equivalent surcharge, q, the shear resistance of the soil along the
failure surface GI and HJ was neglected.
• Remember:

q D f
24
Mechanism of Failure

25
 Mechanism of Failure
• The shapes of the failure surfaces under ultimate loading conditions are given in Fig.
• The zones of plastic equilibrium represented in this figure by the area gedcf may be
subdivided into three zones:
1 . Zone I of elastic equilibrium
2. Zones II of radial shear state
3. Zones III of Rankine passive state
• When load qu per unit area acting on the base of the footing of width B with a
rough base is transmitted into the soil, the tendency of the soil located within zone
I is to spread but this is counteracted by friction and adhesion between the soil and
the base of the footing.
• Due to the existence of this resistance against lateral spreading, the soil located
immediately beneath the base remains permanently in a state of elastic
equilibrium, and the soil located within this central Zone I behaves as if it were a
part of the footing and sinks with the footing under the superimposed load. 26
 Mechanism of Failure
• The depth of this wedge shaped body of soil abc remains practically unchanged, yet the footing
sinks.
• This process is only conceivable if the soil located just below point c moves vertically
downwards. This type of movement requires that the surface of sliding cd (Fig.) through point c
should start from a vertical tangent. The boundary be of the zone of radial shear bed (Zone II) is
also the surface of sliding.
• As per the theory of plasticity, the potential surfaces of sliding in an ideal plastic material
intersect each other in every point of the zone of plastic equilibrium at an angle (90° - ɸ).
Therefore the boundary be must rise at an angle ɸ to the horizontal provided the friction and
adhesion between the soil and the base of the footing suffice to prevent a sliding motion at the
base.
• The sinking of Zone I creates two zones of plastic equilibrium, II and III, on either side of the
footing. Zone II is the radial shear zone whose remote boundaries bd and af meet the horizontal
surface at angles (45° - ɸ/2), whereas Zone III is a passive Rankine zone. The boundaries de
and fg of these zones are straight lines and they meet the surface at angles of (45° - ɸ/2).
The curved parts cd and cf in Zone II are parts of logarithmic spirals whose centers are located27
Terzaghi’s Bearing Capacity
• Ultimate Bearing Capacity of Soil Strip Footings:
• Terzaghi developed his bearing capacity equation for strip footings by
analyzing the forces acting on the wedge abc in Fig.

• where Qult = ultimate load per unit length of footing, c = unit

cohesion, /the effective unit weight of soil, B = width of footing, D,=
depth of foundation, Nc, Nq and Nɣ are the bearing capacity factors. They
are functions of the angle of friction ɸ.

• where Kp = passive earth pressure coefficient

28
Bearing capacity factors of Terzaghi’s

29
Terzaghi’s Bearing Capacity factors for general shear
failure

30
Equations for Square, Rectangle and Circular Footing

Terzaghi's bearing capacity Eq. has been modified for other types of
foundations by introducing the shape factors. The equations are:
• Square Foundations:

• Circular Foundations:

• Rectangular Foundations:

31
Equations for Square, Rectangle and Circular Footing

Ultimate Bearing Capacity qu in Purely Cohesion-less and Cohesive

Soils Under General Shear Failure:
For cohesion-less soil (for c = 0) and cohesive soils (for ɸ = 0) as follows.
Strip Footing

Square Footing:

Circular Footing

Rectangular Footing
32
 Example -1
A square footing (2.25 m x 2.25 m) is placed at depth of 1.5 m in a sand with the shear
strength parameters c’ = 0 and Φ’ = 38˚. Determine the ultimate bearing capacity of
the foundation. The unit weight of the sand is 18 kN/m3.
For a square footing on sand; using
Given: Df = 1.5 m
B = 2.25 m q ult 1.3cN C  qN q  0.4 γBN γ
 18 kN/m 3
But, the cohesion of sand, c = 0, then
q ult qN q  0.4 γBN γ D f N q  0.4 γBN γ

For Φ = 38˚, by using Terzaghi Bearing Capacity Factors, we

get
Nq = 61.5 and Nγ = 82.3 33
 Example - 1
Then, the ultimate bearing capacity is

q ult qN q  0.4 γBN γ

q ult D f N q  0.4 γBN γ
q ult (18 kN/m 3 1.5 m)(61.5)  0.4(18 kN/m 3 )(2.25 m)(82.3)
2993.76 kN/m 2

34
 Factor of Safety, Fs

Factor of safety, Fs of about 3 or more is applied to the ultimate soil bearing

capacity to arrive at the value of the allowable bearing capacity.

There are two basic definition of the allowable bearing capacity of shallow
foundation:
Gross allowable bearing capacity, qall
Net allowable bearing capacity, qult(net)

35
 Gross allowable bearing capacity, qall

The gross allowable bearing capacity can be calculated as

q ult
q all 
Fs
qall is the allowable load (Qall) per unit area to which the soil under the
foundation should be subjected to avoid any chance of bearing
capacity failure.
Q all
q all 
Area
36
 Net allowable bearing capacity, qall

• The net allowable bearing capacity, qult(net) is the allowable load per
unit area of the foundation in excess of the existing vertical effective
stress at the level of the foundation.
• The vertical effective stress at the foundation level is equal to
q D f
• So, the net ultimate load is
q ult(net) q ult  q
• Hence,
q ult(net) q ult  q q ult  γD f
q all(net)   
Fs Fs Fs
37
 Net allowable bearing capacity, qall

• In the case of shallow footing – there is no significant

difference in the factor of safety obtained in terms of net or
gross pressure.

• The consideration of net pressure is very important for the

case of design of mat or raft foundation.

38
 Example -2
A strip of wall footing 1 m wide is supported by a stiff clay layer with undrained shear
strength of 140 kPa. Unit weight of soil is 20 kN/m3. Depth of footing is 0.6 m. Ground
water was not encountered during subsurface exploration. Determine the allowable wall
load for a factor of safety 3.

Given: B = 1 m, Df = 0.6 m
𝛄= 20 kN/m3 1
For strip footing, using q ult cN C  qN q  γBN γ
2

Shear strength parameters: for undrained condition (fully saturated), Φ = 0˚ and c = 140 kN/m2
By using Terzaghi Bearing Capacity Factors, for Φ = 0˚, we get
Nc = 5.7, Nq = 1.0 and Nγ = 0.0 39
 Example - 2

Thus, the ultimate bearing capacity is

1
q ult cN C  qN q  γBN γ
2
cN C  D f N q  0
(140 kN/m 2 5.7)  (20 kN/m 3 0.6 m 1.0)
810 kN/m 2

Note: 1 kPa = 1 kN/m2

40
 Example - 2

With safety factor, FS = 3

The gross allowable bearing capacity is
q ult 810 kN/m 2
q all   270 kN/m 2
Fs 3

The allowable wall load,

Q all q all B
270 kN/m 2 1 m
270 kN per m length of wall
41
 Example - 3

A square footing 1.5 x 1.5 m in plan is placed at depth of 1 m in a soil with

friction angle, Φ = 20˚ and c = 15.2 kPa. The unit weight of the soil is 17.8
kN/m3. Determine the allowable gross load for a factor of safety 3. Assume
general shear failure occurs in the soil.

Given: size: B x L = 1.5 m x 1.5 m,

Df = 1 m
𝛄 = 17.8 kN/m3

42
 Example - 3

For square footing, using Eq.

q ult 1.3cN C  qN q  0.4 γBN γ
Shear strength parameters: Φ = 20˚ and c = 15.2 kN/m2

By using Terzaghi Bearing Capacity Factors, for Φ = 20˚, we get

Nc = 17.7, Nq = 7.4 and Nγ = 4.4

43
 Example - 3

Thus, the ultimate bearing capacity

q ult 1.3cN C  qN q  0.4 γBN γ
1.3cN C  D f N q  0.4 γBN γ
(1.3 15.2 kN/m 2 17.7)  (17.8 kN/m 3 1 m 7.4)
 (0.4 17.8 kN/m 3 1.5 m 4.4)
528.46 kN/m 2

44
 Example - 3

With safety factor, FS = 3

The gross allowable load is
Q all qall Area of the footing
qult
 Area of the footing
Fs
 528.46 kN/m 2 
  1.5 m 1.5 m 
 3 
396.35 kN
45
 Example - 4

From Example #3, calculate total gross load if local shear failure occurs in
the soil.
Solution:
Find shear strength parameters;
2 2
c'  c  (15.2 kPa) 10.13 kPa
3 3
2 2   1 2 
tan  '  tan   tan 20   tan  tan 20 
'

3 3 3 
13.6

46
 Example - 4

For square footing, using Eq.

q ult 1.3c' N C  qN q  0.4 γBN γ

By using Terzaghi Bearing Capacity Factors, for Φ’ = 14˚, we get

Nc = 12.1, Nq = 4.0 and Nγ = 1.9

47
 Example - 4

Thus, the ultimate bearing capacity

q ult 1.3c' N C  qN q  0.4 γBN γ

1.3c' N C  D f N q  0.4 γBN γ
(1.3 10.13 kN/m 2 12.1)  (17.8 kN/m3 1 m 4.0)
 (0.4 17.8 kN/m3 1.5 m 1.9)
250.84 kN/m 2

48
 Example - 4

With safety factor, FS = 3

The gross allowable load is

Q all qall Area of the footing
qult
 Area of the footing
Fs
 250.84 kN/m 2 
  1.5 m 1.5 m 
 3 
188.13 kN 49
 Effect of Water Table on Bearing Capacity
• The presence of ground water table will influence the bearing
capacity of footing.
• Groundwater reduces the density of soil due to buoyancy.
• When groundwater is present, the density of the soil needs to
be modified.
• Depending on the position of water table, the second and
third terms in the bearing capacity equation may require
modification.

50
 Effect of Water Table on Bearing Capacity
• The effect of groundwater table can be categorized into four
conditions;
• Case 1:
GWT at the ground surface (Fully submerged)
• Case 2:
GWT above foundation base
• Case 3:
GWT at the foundation base
• Case 4:
GWT at a depth D below the foundation base.

51
 Case 1: GWT at the ground surface
• If the groundwater table is located at the
soil surface, then,
• The magnitude of q in the second term
of the bearing capacity equation should
be calculated as;
q ' D

• Where,
 ' sat  w = effective unit weight of
soil

• The 
unit
' weight of soil, in the second
and third term of the bearing capacity 52
 Case 2: GWT above foundation base
• If groundwater table is located at a
distance D above the bottom of the
foundation,
• The magnitude of q in the second
term of the bearing capacity
q  D f  D   ' D
equation should be calculated as;

• ' sat  w = effective unit weight of soil

Where,

The unit weight of soil,  ' in the third term of the bearing capacity
equations should be replaced by ' .
53
 Case 3: GWT at the foundation base
• If the groundwater table is at the
bottom of the foundation,
• The magnitude of q in the second
term of the bearing capacity
equation is equal
to; q D f

• However, the unit weight of soil,

in the third term of the bearing
'
capacity equations should be
replaced by . 54
 Case 4: GWT at a depth D below foundation base
• When the groundwater table is at a depth D
below the bottom of the foundation,
• The magnitude of q in the second term of
the bearing capacity equation is equal to;

q D f
• The magnitude of  in the third term of the
bearing capacity equations should be
replaced by av .
1
av  D   ' B  D  For D B
B
av  For D  B
55
 Effect of Water Table on Bearing Capacity
• In case the water table lies at any intermediate depth less than the
depth (Df+ B), the bearing capacity equations are affected due to the
presence of the water table.

56
Effect of Water Table on Bearing Capacity

57
 Example 5
A square footing (2.25 m x 2.25 m) is placed at depth of 1.5 m in a sand
with the shear strength parameters c’ = 0 and Φ’ = 38˚. Determine the
ultimate bearing capacity of the foundation if water table exists at the
ground surface. The unit weight of the sand is 18 kN/m 3 and the saturated
unit weight of the sand is 20 kN/m3.

Given: Df = 1.5 m
B = 2.25 m

58
Example 5

59
Example 5

• For a square footing on sand; using

q ult 1.3cN C  qN q  0.4 γBN γ
• But, the cohesion of sand, c = 0, and the groundwater table exist at the
ground surface, then Eq. was modified to,
q ult ' DN q  0.4 γ' BN γ


• Where, assumed w 9.81 kN/m 3
, then
' sat  w (20  9.81) kN/m 3

3
10.19 kN/m
60
Example 5

• For Φ = 38˚, by using Terzaghi Bearing Capacity Factors, we get

• Nq = 61.5 and Nγ = 82.3

• Then, the ultimate bearing capacity is

q ult ' DN q  0.4 γ' BN γ
q ult (10.19 kN/m 3 1.5 m)(61.5)  0.4(10.19 kN/m 3 )(2.25 m)(82.3)
1694.8 kN/m 2

61
General Bearing Capacity Equation

• After the development of Terzaghi’s bearing capacity

equation, several investigators worked in this area and
refined the solution.
• For examples; Meyerhoff (1951, 1963), Hansen (1961) and
etc.
• Meyerhoff argued that bearing capacity of foundation is not
only affected by the shape of foundation but by others factors
as well.

62
General Bearing Capacity Equation

• The soil-bearing capacity equation for a strip footing for earlier

equation can be modified for general use by incorporating the
following factors:
• Shape factor: to determine the bearing capacity of rectangular and
circular footings.
• Depth factor: to account for the shearing resistance developed
along the failure surface in soil above the bottom of the footing.
• Inclination factor: To determine the bearing capacity of a footing
on which the direction of load application is inclined at a certain
angle to the vertical.

63
General Bearing Capacity Equation
• Meyerhoff (1951,1963) was modified the general bearing capacity
formula to account all the factors as follows;
Q 1
q ult  cN C sc d c ic  qN q sq d q iq  BN  s d  i
BL 2

• Where;
s = the shape factor,
d = the depth factor,
i = the load inclination factor, and
Nc, Nq and Nγ =BBearing
and L = capacity
the dimension
factorsof(Meyerhoff
footing and Brinch &
Hansen) 64
 Shape Factors
• Shape factors for rectangular footing:
(B = width of footing, L = length of footing)

 B   N q 
s c 1    
 L   N c 
 B
s q 1    tan 
 L
 B
s 1  0.4 
 L

65
Shape Factors
• Shape factors for square and circular footing:

66
 Example 6

A foundation is designed on a soil with b 16.8 kN/m.

3 sat 17.6 kN/m 3
The shear strength parameters of the soil are, c = 80 kPa and Φ = 15˚. The
depth of embedment is 1.2 m and the size of foundation is 1.5 x 2 m.
Determine the ultimate bearing capacity of the foundation and the
allowable load if factor of safety is 3.

Given:
Df = 1.2 m, B = 1.5 m, L = 2 m

Use general bearing capacity equation;

67
 Example 6
1
q ult cN C sc  D f N q sq  BN  s
2
• From Table 2 (Meyerhoff Bearing Capacity Factors); for Φ = 15˚, we get
• Nc = 10.98, Nq = 3.94 and Nγ = 1.13

 B   N q   1.5 m   3.94 
s c 1      1     1.27
Calculate the shape factors;  L  N c   2 m   10.98 
 B  1.5 m 
s q 1    tan  1   
 tan 15 1.2
 L  2m 
 B  1.5 m 
s 1  0.4  1  0.4  0.7
 L  2m 
68
Example 6

Use, b 16.8 kN/m 3

(There are no groundwater effect)
Then, the ultimate bearing capacity is
1
q ult cN C sc  D f N q sq  BN  s
2
(80 kN/m 2 10.98 1.27)  (16.8 kN/m 3 1.2 m 3.94 1.2)
1 3 
  16.8 kN/m 1.5 m 1.13 0.7 
2 
1220.85 kN/m 2

69
Example 6
With safety factor, Fs = 3
The allowable load is

Q all qall Area of the footing

qult
 Area of the footing
Fs
 1220.85 kN/m 2 
  1.5 m 2 m 
 3 
1220.85 kN
70
Depth Factors (Hansen, 1970)

• The depth of embedment influences the shear strength at

failure plane.
• This factor can be neglected if the soil above foundation base
is not stable or not compacted.

71
Depth Factors (Hansen, 1970)

72
IS 6403: 1981

73
IS 6403: 1981

74
Example 7

Do Example #6 by taking into account the depth factor.

Solution:
Use general bearing capacity equation;
1
q ult cN C sc d c  D f N q sq d q  BN  s d 
2

From Meyerhoff Bearing Capacity Factors;

for Φ = 15˚, we get
Nc = 10.98, Nq = 3.94 and Nγ = 1.13 75
Example 7

Shape factor; s c 1.27, s q 1.2, s γ 0.7

Depth factor;
Df
D f 1.2 m; B 1.5 m  0.8  1
B

 Df 
d c 1  0.4  1  0.40.8 1.32
 B 
 Df 
 tan  1  sin  
2
d q 1  2
 B 
1  20.8tan 15 1  sin 15


 2
1.24
d γ 1 76
Example 7

Then, the ultimate bearing capacity is

1
q ult cN C sc d c  D f N q sq d q  BN  s d
2
(80 kN/m 2 10.98 1.27 1.32)
 (16.8 kN/m 3 1.2 m 3.94 1.2 1.24)
1 3 
  16.8 kN/m 1.5 m 1.13 0.7 1
2 
1600.71 kN/m 2
77
Example 7

• With safety factor, Fs = 3

• The allowable load is
Q all qall Area of the footing
qult
 Area of the footing
Fs
 1600.71 kN/m 2 
  1.5 m 2 m 
 3 
1600.71 kN
78
BC of Foundations Subjected to Eccentric Loading

• If a foundation is subjected to lateral loads and moments in

addition to vertical loads, eccentricity in loading results.
• The point of application of the resultant of all the loads would
lie outside the geometric center of the foundation, resulting in
eccentricity in loading.
• The eccentricity e is measured from the center of the
foundation to the point of application normal to the axis of the
foundation.
• The maximum eccentricity normally allowed is B/6 where B is
the width of the foundation. 79
BC of Foundations Subjected to Eccentric Loading

80
 BC of Foundations Subjected to Eccentric Loading
• When a foundation is subjected to an eccentric vertical load, it tilts towards
the side of the eccentricity and the contact pressure increases on the side of
tilt and decreases on the opposite side.
• Settlement of the footing will be associated with tilting of the base towards
the side of eccentricity.
• If the eccentricity is very small, the load required to produce this type of
failure is almost equal to the load required for producing a symmetrical
general shear failure
• Failure occurs due to intense radial shear on one side of the plane of
symmetry, while the deformations in the zone of radial shear on the other
side are still insignificant. For this reason the failure is always associated
with a heave on that side towards which the footing tilts. 81
BC of Foundations Subjected to Eccentric Loading

82
Max and Min Base Pressure under Eccentric Loading

83
Max and Min Base Pressure under Eccentric Loading

84
Max and Min Base Pressure under Eccentric Loading

85
Example

86
Example

87
 Field Methods to Determine BC
• Plate load test
• Standard Penetration Test
• Cone Penetration Test

88
Plate Load Test

89
Plate Load Test

90
Plate Load Test

91
Plate Load Test

92
Plate Load Test

93
Plate Load Test

94
Plate Load Test

95
Plate Load Test

96
Plate Load Test

97
Plate Load Test

98
Standard Penetration Test

99
 Standard Penetration Test - Apparatus

1) Tripod stand
2) Standard split-spoon sampler.
It consists of three parts:-
(a) Driving shoe, about 75 mm long.
(b) Steel tube about 450mm long, split longitudinally in two halves
having inner diameter as 38mm & outer diameter as 50mm.
(c) Coupling at the top of the tube about 150 mm long.
3) Guide pipe
4) Drill rod
5) Drop hammer weighing 63.5kg. 100
SPT- Procedure

101
SPT - Procedure

102
 SPT - Procedure
• The bore hole is to be drilled up to the desired depth.
• The drilling tools are removed & sampler is lowered to the bottom of the hole.
• Three markings@150mm are made on the rod of sampler.
• The sampler is driven into the soil by drop hammer falling through the height
of 150 mm @ 30 blows/min.
• The number of blows required to drive each 150mm of the sampler is
counted.
• The number of blows recorded for the first 150mm is disregarded.
• The number of blows recorded for the last two 150mm intervals are added to
give the standard penetration number(N)
• Likewise, the another samples of soil are collected at the interval of 1.67 m or
where the soil profile or strata changes (IS 6403:1981) 103
SPT - Procedure

104
SPT - Procedure

105
SPT - Procedure

106
SPT

107
SPT

108
SPT

109
 Ultimate Bearing Capacity Of Footings Based On SPT
Values (N]
Standard Energy Ratio Res Applicable to N Value
The empirical correlations established in the USA between N and
soil properties indicate the value of N conforms to certain standard
energy ratios. Some suggest 70% (Bowles, 1996) and others 60%
(Terzaghi et al., 1996).

The relation between Ncor and ɸ established by Peck et al., (1974)

is given in a graphical form in Fig. The value of Ncor to be used
for getting ɸ is the corrected value for standard energy. The angle
ɸ obtained by this method can be used for obtaining the bearing
capacity factors, and hence the ultimate bearing capacity of soil.
110
 Ultimate Bearing Capacity Of Footings Based On SPT
Values (N]
Cohesive Soils
Relationship Between Ncor and qu (Unconfined Compressive
Strength) Relationships have been developed between Ncor and qu
(the undrained compressive strength) for the ɸ = 0 condition. This
relationship gives the value of cu for any known value of Ncor. The
relationship may be expressed as Eq.
where the value of the coefficient & may vary from a minimum of
12 to a maximum of 25

111
112
Cone Penetration Test

113
Cone Penetration Test

114
Cone Penetration Test

115
Cone Penetration Test

116
Cone Penetration Test

117
Cone Penetration Test

118
Cone Penetration Test

119
Thank You

120