Sei sulla pagina 1di 48

CE-632

CE 632
Foundation Analysis and
Design

Ultimate Bearing Capacity


The load per unit area of the foundation at which shear failure in soil
occurs is
i called
ll d the
th ultimate
lti t bearing
b i capacity. it
1
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Principal Modes of Failure:


General Shear Failure: Load / Area
q

qu

Settlement
Sudden or catastrophic failure
Well defined failure surface
Bulging on the ground surface adjacent to foundation
Common failure mode in dense sand

2
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Principal Modes of Failure:


Load / Area
Local Shear Failure: q
qu1

Setttlement
qu

Common in sand or clay with medium compaction


Significant settlement upon loading
Failure surface first develops
p right
g below the foundation and then
slowly extends outwards with load increments
Foundation movement shows sudden jerks first (at qu1) and then
after a considerable amount of movement the slip surface may
reachh th
the ground.
d
A small amount of bulging may occur next to the foundation.
3
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Principal Modes of Failure:


Load / Area
Punching Failure: q
qu1

qu

Setttlement
Common in fairly loose sand or soft clay
Failure surface does not extends beyond the zone right beneath the
foundation
Extensive settlement with a wedge shaped soil zone in elastic
equilibrium beneath the foundation. Vertical shear occurs around the
edges of foundation.
Aft reaching
After hi ffailure
il lload-settlement
d ttl t curve continues
ti att some slope
l
and mostly linearly.
4
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Principal Modes of Failure:


Relative density of sand, Dr Vesic (1973)
0 0.5
05 1.0
10
n, Df/B*

0
General
Local 2BL
shear
B = *
undation

shear
B+L
pth of fou

Circular
Foundation
5
ative dep

Punching
Rela

shear Long
Rectangular
Foundation
10
5
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

g
Terzaghis g Capacity
Bearing p y Theory
y
B

Rough Foundation Strip Footing


Surface
j k
neglected qu Effective
Eff ti overburden
b d
Df q = .Df
a b
g 45/2 45/2 i
I
III III
B
Shear II II c-
c soil
Planes d f
e

Assumption
L/B ratio is large plain strain problem
Df B
Shear resistance of soil for Df depth is neglected
General shear failure
Shear strength is governed by Mohr-Coulomb Criterion 6
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Terzaghi s Bearing Capacity Theory


Terzaghis
B
1
qu .B = 2.Pp + 2.Ca .sin B 2 tan
4
qu
1
qu .B = 2.Pp + B.c.sin B 2 tan
b
4
a

Ca= B/2 I Pp = Pp + Ppc + Ppq
Ca B.tan
cos
Pp = due to only self weight of soil
d
in shear zone
Pp Pp Ppc = due to soil cohesion only
(soil is weightless)

Ppq = due to surcharge only

7
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Terzaghi s Bearing Capacity Theory


Terzaghis
Weight term Cohesion term


qu .B = 2.Pp B 2 tan + ( 2.Ppc + B.c.sin ) + 2.Ppq
1
4
Surcharge term

B. ( 0.5 B.N ) B.c.N c B.q.N q

Terzaghis bearing
qu = c.N c + q.N q + 0.5 B.N capacity equation

Terzaghis bearing capacity factors

1 K P e2a
N = tan 2 1 Nq =
2
2 cos 2 cos 45 +
2
N c = ( N q 1) cot 3 in rad.
a= tan
4 2 8
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

9
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Terzaghi s Bearing Capacity Theory


Terzaghis

Local Shear Failure:


2 2
Modify the strength parameters such as: cm = c m = tan 1 tan
3 3
2
qu = c.N c + q.N q + 0.5 B.N
3

Square and circular footing:

qu = 1.3c.N c + q.N q + 0.4 B.N For square

qu = 1.3c.N c + q.N q + 0.3 B.N For circular

10
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Terzaghi s Bearing Capacity Theory


Terzaghis
Effect of water table:
Case I: Dw Df
Surcharge, q = .Dw + ( D f Dw ) Dw

Case II: Df Dw (Df + B) Df


Surcharge, q = .DF
In bearing capacity equation B
replace by-
Dw D f
=+ ( ) B
B
Case III: Dw > (Df + B)
Li it off iinfluence
Limit fl
No influence of water table.

Another recommendation for Case II:


d w = Dw D f
dw
= ( 2H + dw ) + 2 ( H dw )
2
2 sat Rupture depth: H = 0.5 B tan ( 45 + 2 )
H H 11
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

p
Skemptons g Capacity
Bearing p y Analysis
y for
cohesive Soils
~ For saturated cohesive soil, = 0 N q = 1, and N = 0
Df
For strip footing: N c = 5 1 + 0.2 with limit of N c 7.5
B
Df
For square/circular N c = 6 1 + 0.2 with limit of N c 9.0
footing:
g B

Df B
For rectangular footing: N c = 5 1 + 0.2 1 + 0.2 for D f 2.5
B L
B
N c = 7.5 1 + 0.2 for D f > 2.5
L

qu = c.N c + q
Net ultimate bearing capacity, qnu = qu .D f qu = c.N c
12
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Effective Area Method for Eccentric Loading

In case of Moment loading


My
ex =
Df FV

Mx
B ey =
AF=BL FV
B=B-2ey

IIn case off Horizontal


H i t l Force
F att
L=L-2ey some height but the column is
ey
centered on the foundation
ex

M y = FHx .d FH
M x = FHy .d FH

13
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

General Bearing Capacity Equation:


(Meyerhof, 1963)
0 5 .B.N .s .d .i
qu = c.N c .sc .dc .ic + q.N q .sq .d q .iq + 0.5
Shape Depth inclination Empirical
p correction
f t
factor factor f t
factor factors

N c = ( N q 1) cot N = ( N q 1) tan (11.4


4 )
N q = tan 2 45 + .e .tan
2
[[Byy Hansen(1970):
( ) N = 1.5 ( N q 1) tan ( )

[By Vesic(1973): N = 2 ( N q + 1) tan ( )

qu = c.N c .sc .dc .ic .gc .bc + q.N q .sq .d q .iq .g q .bq + 0.5 .B.N .s .d .i .g .b
Ground factor Base factor
14
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

15
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

M
Meyerhofs
h f Correction
C i Factors:
F

for 10o
Shape
B
sc = 1 + 0.2 tan 2 45 + B 2
sq = s = 1 + 0.1 tan 45 +
Factors L 2 L 2
for lower value
sq = s = 1

Depth Df for 10o


Factors d c = 1 + 0.2 tan 45 + Df
L 2 d q = d = 1 + 0.1 tan 45 +
L 2
for lower value
d q = d = 1

2
o
2
Inclination
Factors ic = iq = 1 i = 1
90
16
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Hansens Correction Factors:


1 (1 FH )
1/2
FH
Inclination ic = 1 for = 0 ic = 1 + for > 0
Factors 2 BL.c 2 BL.su
5

5
0 5F
0.5 FH 0 7F
0.7 FH
iq = 1 i = 1
F V + BL .c .cot FV + BL .c .cot
For = 0 For > 0
Depth
Df Df
Factors d c = 0.4 for D f B d c = 1 + 0.4 for D f B
B B
1
Df 1
Df
d
c = 0.4 tan for D f > B d
c = 1 + 0.4 tan for D f > B
B B
For D f < B For D f > B
2 Df
d q = 1 + 2 tan . (1 sin )
2 1
d q = 1 + 2 tan . (1 sin ) tan
Df

d = 1

B B

Shape B B
Factors
sc = 0.2ic . for = 0 sc = 0.2 (1 2ic ) . for > 0
L L
sq = 1 + iq . ( B L ) sin
i 0 4i . ( B L )
s = 1 0.4

Hansens Recommendation for cohesive saturated soil, '=0 qu = c.N c . (1 + sc + d c + ic ) + q


Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Notes:

1. Notice use of effective


base dimensions B, L by
H
Hansen b
butt nott by
b Vesic.
V i

2. The values are consistent


with a vertical load or a
vertical load accompanied by
a horizontal load HB.

3. With a vertical load and a


load HL (and either HB=0 or
HB>0) you may have to
compute two sets of shape
and depth factors si,B, si,L
and di,B, di,L. For i,L
subscripts use ratio L/B or
D/L.

4. Compute qu independently
by using (siB, diB) and (siL,
diL) and use min value for
design.

18
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Notes:

1. Use Hi as either HB or HL,


or both if HL>0.

2. Hansen (1970) did not give


an ic for >0. The value given
here is from Hansen (1961)
and also used by Vesic.

3. Variable ca = base
adhesion, on the order of 0.6
to 1.0 x base cohesion.

4. Refer to sketch on next


slide for identification of
angles and , footing depth
D, location of Hi (parallel and
at top of base slab; usually
also produces eccentricity)
eccentricity).
Especially notice V = force
normal to base and is not the
resultant R from combining V
and Hi..

19
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

20
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

N t
Note:

1. When =0 (and 0) use


( ) in N term.
N = -2sin(

2. Compute m = mB when
Hi = HB (H parallel to B) and
m = mL when Hi = HL (H
parallel to L). If you have
both HB and HL use
m = (mB2 + mL2)1/2. Note use
of B and LL, not BB,L
L.

3. Hi term 1.0 for


computing iq, i (always).

21
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Suitability of Methods

22
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

IS:6403-1981 Recommendations
Net Ultimate Bearing capacity: qnu = c.Nc .sc .dc .ic + q. ( N q 1) .sq .d q .iq + 0.5 .B.N .s .d .i

For cohesive soils qnu = cu .N c .sc .d c .ic where


where, N c = 5.14
5 14
N c , N q , N as per Vesic(1973) recommendations

B B B
Shape For rectangle, sc = 1 + 0.2 sq = 1 + 0.2 s = 1 0.4
Factors L L L
For square and circle, 1 3 sq = 1.2
sc = 1.3 12
s = 0.8 for square, s = 0.6 for circle
Df
Depth d c = 1 + 0.2 tan 45 +
Factors L 2
Df
d q = d = 1 + 0.1 tan 45 + for 10o
L 2
d q = d = 1 for < 10o
Inclination
Factors The same as Meyerhof (1963) 23
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Bearing Capacity
Correlations with
S
SPT-value
a ue
Peck, Hansen, and
Thornburn (1974)
&
IS:6403-1981
Recommendation

24
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Bearing Capacity Correlations with SPT-value


SPT value
Teng (1962):
For Strip Footing:
1
( )
qnu = 3 N 2 .B.Rw + 5 100 + N 2 .D f .Rw
6
1 2
( )
For Square
F S andd
Circular Footing: qnu = N .B.Rw + 3 100 + N 2 .D f .Rw
3
For Df > B,
B take Df = B

Dw
Water Table Corrections:
Df
Dw
Rw = 0.5 1 +
D f [ Rw 1
B

Dw D f
Rw = 0.5 1 +
[ Rw 1 B
Df
Limit of influence 25
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Bearing Capacity Correlations with CPT-value


0. 2500
IS:6403-1981 Recommendation:
Cohesionless Soil
0.1675
qnu
qc 0.1250 0
0.5
Df
B =1
0.0625 B
1.5B qc value is
to taken as
2.0B average for 0
this zone 0 100 200 300 400

B (cm)
Schmertmann (1975):
qc kg
N N q in
0.8 cm 2
26
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Bearing Capacity Correlations with CPT-value


IS:6403-1981 Recommendation:
Cohesive Soil

qnu = cu .N c .sc .dc .ic

Point Resistance Values Range of Undrained


Soil Type
( qc ) kgf/cm2 Cohesion (kgf/cm2)

Normally consolidated
qc < 20 qc/18 to qc/15
clays

Over consolidated clays qc > 20 qc/26 to qc/22

27
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Bearing Capacity of Footing on Layered Soil


Depth of rupture zone =
B
tan 45 + or approximately taken as B
2 2
Case I: Layer-1 is weaker than Layer-2
Design using parameters of Layer -1

Case II: Layer-1 is stronger than Layer-2


Distribute the stresses to Layer-2 by 2:1 method
1 and check the bearing capacity at this level for
B
limit state.
2
Layer-1 Also check the bearing capacity for original
L
Layer-2
2 foundation level using parameters of Layer-1
Layer 1
B
Choose minimum value for design

B
Another approximate method for c- soil: For effective depth 4 + B
tan 45
2 2
Find average c and and use them for ultimate bearing capacity calculation

c1 H1 + c2 H 2 + c3 H 3 + .... tan 1 H1 + tan 2 H 2 + tan 3 H 3 + ....


cav = tan av =
H1 + H 2 + H 3 + .... H1 + H 2 + H 3 + .... 28
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

g Capacity
Bearing p y of Stratified Cohesive Soil
IS:6403-1981 Recommendation:

29
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

g Capacity
Bearing y of Footing
g on Layered
y Soil:
Stronger Soil Underlying Weaker Soil

Depth H is relatively small Depth H is relatively large


Punching shear failure in top layer Full failure surface develops in top
General shear failure in bottom layer
y itself
layer

30
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Bearing Capacity of
Footing
F ti on Layered
L d Soil:
S il
Stronger Soil Underlying
Weaker
ea e So
Soil

31
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Bearing Capacity of Footing on Layered Soil:


Stronger
St Soil
S il Underlying
U d l i Weaker
W k Soil
S il

Bearing capacities of continuous footing of with B


under vertical load on the surface of homogeneous
thick bed of upper and lower soil

32
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Bearing Capacity of Footing on Layered Soil:


Stronger Soil Underlying Weaker Soil
2ca H 2
2 D f K s tan 1
For Strip Footing: qu = qb + + 1H 1 + 1 H qt
B H B
Where, qt is the bearing capacity for foundation considering
only the top layer to infinite depth

For Rectangular Footing:


B 2c H 2 B 2 D f K s tan 1
qu = qb + 1 + a + 1H 1 + L 1 + H 1 H qt
L B B
Special
p Cases:
1. Top layer is strong sand and bottom layer is saturated soft clay
c1 = 0 2 = 0
2. Top layer is strong sand and bottom layer is weaker sand
c1 = 0 c2 = 0
2 Top layer is strong saturated clay and bottom layer is weaker saturated clay
2.
1 = 0 2 = 0
33
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

y Loaded Foundations
Eccentrically
Q
M M
e=
Q
Q 6M Q 6e
qmax = + qmax = 1 +
B BL B 2 L BL B

Q 6M Q 6e
qmin = qmin = 1
BL B 2 L BL B

e 1
For > There will be separation
e B 6
of foundation from the soil beneath
and stresses will be redistributed.
B = B 2e
Use for sc , sq , s , and B, L for d c , d q , d to obtain qu
L = L
The effective area method for two way eccentricity becomes
Qu = qu . A a little more complex than what is suggested above.
It is discussed in the subsequent slides 34
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Determination of Effective Dimensions for Eccentrically


Loaded
L d d foundations
f d ti (Highter
(Hi ht and d Anders,
A d 1985)

C
Case II: eL 1 e 1
and B
L 6 B 6
3 3e
B1 = B B
B1 2 B
eB
3 3eL
L1 = L
L eL L1
2 L

L = max ( B1 , L1 )
1
A = L1 B1
2
B A
B =
L

35
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant
Determination of Effective Dimensions for Eccentrically Loaded
foundations (Highter and Anders,
Anders 1985)

eL e 1
Case II: < 0.5 and 0 < B <
L B 6

L2 eB

eL L1

1
A = ( L1 + L2 ) B A
2 B =
L = max ( B1 , L1 ) L
36
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant
Determination of Effective Dimensions for Eccentrically Loaded
foundations (Highter and Anders,
Anders 1985)

Case III: eL < 1 and 0 < eB < 0.5


L 6 B

B1

eB

eL

B2
1
A = L ( B1 + B2 )
A
2
B =
L = L L
37
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant
Determination of Effective Dimensions for Eccentrically Loaded
foundations (Highter and Anders,
Anders 1985)
eL 1 eB 1
Case IV: < and <
L 6 B 6
B1

eB

eL

B2

1
A = L2 B + ( B1 + B2 )( L + L2 )
2
A
L = L B =
L 38
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant
Determination of Effective Dimensions for Eccentrically Loaded
foundations (Highter and Anders,
Anders 1985)

Case V: Circular foundation

eR

A
L =
B

39
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Meyerhofs (1953) area correction based on empirical


correlations:
l ti (American
(A i Petroleum
P t l Institute,
I tit t 1987)

40
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Bearing Capacity of
Footings
F ti on Slopes
Sl
Meyerhofs (1957)
Solution

qu = cN cq + 0.5
0 5 BN q

Granular Soil
c = 0

qu = 0.5 BN q

41
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Bearing Capacity of
Footings
F ti on Slopes
Sl
Meyerhofs (1957)
Solution

Cohesive Soil
= 0

qu = cN cq

H
Ns =
c 42
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant
Bearing Capacity of
Footings on Slopes
Graham et al. (1988),
Based on method of
characteristics
1000

For
Df
100 =0
B

10
0 10 20 30 40
43
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Bearing Capacity of
Footings on Slopes
Graham et al. (1988),
Based on method of
characteristics
1000

For
Df
100
=0
B

10
0 10 20 30 40
44
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Bearing Capacity of Footings on Slopes


G h
Graham ett al.
l (1988),
(1988) Based
B d on method
th d off characteristics
h t i ti

For
Df
= 0.5
B

45
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Bearing Capacity of Footings on Slopes


G h
Graham ett al.
l (1988),
(1988) Based
B d on method
th d off characteristics
h t i ti

For
Df
= 1.0
B

46
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Bearing Capacity of Footings on Slopes


B l (1997):
Bowles (1997) A simplified
i lifi d approachh
B
B = 45+/2
/2
f' g''
f g qu
qu
Df a'
a cc'
c
45/2
e
e'
45/2 ro
r
b'
b
d b
d'

B
g' Compute the reduced factor Nc as:
qu Labd e
f' N c = N c .
a' c' Labde
e'
45/2
Compute the reduced factor Nq as:
Aaef g
b'
N q = N q .
d' Aaefg 47
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Soil Compressibility Effects on Bearing Capacity


Vesics (1973) Approach
Use of soil compressibility factors in general bearing capacity equation.
These correction factors are function of the rigidity of soil
Gs
Rigidity Index of Soil, Ir: Ir =
c + vo
tan
B
3.30 0.45 L B

Critical Rigidity Index of Soil, Icr:
tan 45
2
I rc = 0.5.e
B/2

Compressibility Correction Factors, cc, cg, and cq


vo = . ( D f + B / 2 )
For I r I rc cc = cq = c = 1
B 3.07.sin .log10 ( 2. I r )
0.6 4.4 .tan +
1+ sin
For I r < I rc cq = c = e L
1
B
For = 0 cc = 0.32 + 0.12 + 0.60.log I r
L
1 cq
For > 0 cc = cq
N q tan 48

Potrebbero piacerti anche