14-09-2023
CE303 Geotechnical Engineering - II
BEARING CAPACITY OF
SHALLOW FOUNDATION
Dr. Sanjit Biswas
Department of Civil Engineering
NIT Warangal
Bearing Capacity
• Bearingcapacity can be defined as the maximum pressure that can be
imposed on the soil without shear failure or excessive settlement of
the foundation.
Terzaghi’s Method
Analytical
Method Meyerhof’s Method
Standard Penetration Test (SPT)
Experimental
Static Cone Penetration Test (SCPT)
Method
Plate Load Test (PLT)
1
14-09-2023
Terminology
• Ultimate Bearing Capacity (qu) - It is the maximum bearing
capacity of soil at which the soil fails by shear.
• NetUltimate Bearing Capacity (qnu) - It is the ultimate bearing
capacity of soil in excess of the overburden pressure.
qnu = qu - γdf where, df is the depth of foundation
• Gross Safe Bearing Capacity (qgs) -
qgs = qu / FOS
• Net Safe Bearing Capacity (qns) - Generally used for the design.
qns = qnu / FOS = (qu - γdf ) / FOS
Terminology
• SafeBearing Capacity (qs) - It is the maximum pressure that can be
allowed on the soil without the settlement exceeding the
permissible value. No factor of Safety (FOS) is used when dealing
with the settlement.
• Allowable Bearing Capacity (qa) - It is the maximum pressure that
can be imposed on the soil with no possibility of shear failure or
excessive settlement. Hence, it is the smaller of net safe bearing
capacity (qns) and safe bearing capacity (qs).
2
14-09-2023
Modes of Soil Failure
• Ifthe load-settlement behavior of a strip footing resting on a
surface of homogeneous soil is obtained then the behavior is found
to be related to the soil characteristics. It is due to the generation of
different soil failure zones depending upon the subsoil condition
which develop resistance to the foundation load. The state of
plastic equilibrium reached within the failure zones.
These failure patterns can be divided into three different types as per
the pattern of the load settlement curve.
1. General Shear Failure
2. Local Shear Failure
3. Punching Shear Failure
General Shear Failure
• This failure mode shows brittle type load-settlement behavior
similar to stress-strain behavior of dense sand or stiff clay. The
ultimate load can be clearly located from the load-settlement curve.
• Thistype of failure is observed for the sand having relative density
value more than 70 % or low compressible fine soil.
• The failure patter can be identified by:
• Well defined failure pattern reaches up to ground surface.
• A sudden catastrophic failure.
• A bulging of ground surface.
3
14-09-2023
General Shear Failure
Local Shear Failure
• Thisfailure mode shows ductile type load-settlement behavior similar
to the stress-strain behavior loose sand or strong clay. The ultimate
load can be located from the load-settlement curve by following
special procedures.
• Thistype of failure is observed for the sand having relative density
value of 35 % - 70 %.
• The failure patter can be identified by:
• Well defined wedge surface below footing only.
• Compression of the soil directly beneath the foundation.
• A gradual failure.
• A slight bulging of the ground surface.
4
14-09-2023
Local Shear Failure
Punching Shear Failure
• This type of shear failure occurs when soil is very loose or posses the
stress-strain characteristics of a plastic soil. The load-settlement curve
shows continuous increase in settlement. The ultimate load cannot be
recognized from the load-settlement curve.
• Thistype of failure is observed for the sand having relative density
below 35 %.
• The features of the failure patter are:
• Soil beyond the loaded area is little affected.
• A significant compression of the soil just beneath the foundation only.
5
14-09-2023
Punching Shear Failure
Terzaghi’s Bearing Capacity Theory (1943)
• The ultimate bearing capacity of shallow foundation is usually
determined by using a bearing capacity theory in which a failure
mechanism is postulated and the load intensity of failure is
expressed in terms of the shearing resistance mobilized and the
geometry of the problem.
• The theory is based on the limiting equilibrium approach, where
the forces acting on the soil wedge immediately beneath the
foundation are examined for the static equilibrium condition and
the ultimate bearing capacity is determined.
6
14-09-2023
Assumptions
• The soil is homogeneous and isotropic.
• The footing is a strip footing.
• It is a shallow foundation (df/B < 1).
• General shear failure is assumed with constant soil volume.
• The footing is a surface footing with a uniformly surcharge equal to γdf.
• Shear strength of the soil is governed by Mohr-Coulomb failure
criterion.
• The base of the footing is rough.
• The load is vertical and symmetrical.
Terzaghi’s Bearing Capacity Theory
7
14-09-2023
Terzaghi’s Bearing Capacity Theory
Zone I
• When the footing sinks into the soil, a certain portion of the soil
immediately beneath the footing is prevented from undergoing any
lateral movement.
• The Zone I remains in a state of elastic equilibrium and effectively
is a part of the footing itself.
• Atfailure, the vertical downward movement of the footing and the
intact soil wedge pushes the soil an either side of the footing and
transform the other zones in a state of plastic equilibrium.
Terzaghi’s Bearing Capacity Theory
Zone II
• It
is the zone of radial shear. Shear planes radiate from the edge of
the footing in these zone.
• The curved lower boundary of these zones has the shape of
logarithmic spiral.
Zone III
• These zones adjacent to Zone II are Rankine’s passive zone in
which the shear planes are inclined at an angle (45˚ - φ/2) to the
horizontal.
8
14-09-2023
Terzaghi’s Bearing Capacity Equation
qu = cNc + qNq + 0.5γBNγ [q = γdf]
In the equation, qu is the ultimate bearing capacity. The Nc, Nq, Nγ
are the bearing capacity factors which are depended only upon the
angle of shearing resistance (φ) of the soil. The qu can be evaluated
either total or effective stress condition.
At φ = 0, Nc = 5.7, Nq = 1, Nγ = 0
Terzaghi’s Bearing Capacity Theory
9
14-09-2023
For Local Shear Failure
For local shear failure, the following modification can be done
cL = 2/3 c and tanφL = 2/3 tanφ
• For sand (c = 0), φ ≥ 36˚ indicate that general shear failure is
likely to occur. φ ≤ 28˚ the local shear failure can be assume. In
between that the values can be obtained from interpolation.
• Inthe case of purely cohesive soil, local shear failure may be
assumed to occur in soft to medium stiff clay with an unconfined
compressive strength < 100 kPa.
For Square and Circular Footing
The yield zone occurring in the soil beneath a footing of square and
circular shape are three dimensional, unlike a strip footing. Hence,
the following modifications need to be done for square and circular
footing.
qu = 1.3 cNc + qNq + 0.4γBNγ for square footing
qu = 1.3 cNc + qNq + 0.3γBNγ for circular footing
qu = (1 + 0.3 B/L) cNc + qNq + (0.5 - 0.1 B/L) γBNγ
for rectangle footing
10
14-09-2023
Effect of Water Table
The rise of the water table changes the value of unit weight of soil
which reduces the value of bearing capacity significantly. The
following modification is to be done in the bearing capacity
equation to take care of that problem.
qu = cNc + γadfNq + 0.5γbBNγ
Effect of Water Table
Case I - If the depth of the water table (dw) is located between the
ground and the footing (df) [0 < dw < df], then
𝛾 =𝛾 + (𝛾 − 𝛾 ) [γt = Unit weight of soil above GWT]
γb = γ́
Case II - If the depth of the water table (d́w) is located below the footing
level but above the depth of footing width (B) [df < d́w < df + B], then
γa = γ t
𝛾 =𝛾 + (𝛾 − 𝛾 ) [γt = Unit weight of soil above GWT]
11
14-09-2023
Meyerhof’s Bearing Capacity Theory (1963)
The theory gave a comprehensive analysis for the bearing capacity
of a strip footings at any depth. The failure mechanism that he took
was similar to Terzaghi, but Meyrehof considered failure surfaces
that extended above the foundation level. Hence, the shear strength
of soil above the base of the footing is also taken into account.
qu = cNcscdcic + γdfNqsqdqiq + 0.5γBNγsγdγiγ
The s, d, i stand for empirical correction factors called shape factor,
depth factor and inclination factor respectively.
The values of the Nc, Nq, Nγ, are different than the Terzaghi’s
bearing capacity factors. For φ = 0, Nc = 5.14, Nq = 1, Nγ = 0.
Meyerhof’s Bearing Capacity Theory
α is the inclination of the resultant load from the vertical, where H and
V are the horizontal and vertical loads at the base of the foundation.
𝐻
𝛼 = 𝑡𝑎𝑛
𝑉
12
14-09-2023
Meyerhof’s Bearing Capacity Theory
Meyerhof’s Bearing Capacity Theory
13
14-09-2023
Bearing Capacity of Eccentric Footing
• Meyerhof also introduce the concept of useful width to compute
the bearing capacity when the resultant load on the footing acts
eccentrically with respect to the center of the footing.
• Toaccount for the eccentricity of
loading, the footing dimensions
are modified in such a way that
load be concentric to the reduced
dimensions of the footing. The
reduced dimensions are used in
place of the actual dimensions
excepts the water table correction
and loading influence zone.
Footing on Layered Soils
• One of the best way to calculate the bearing capacity of soil resting
on layered soil is to use the weighted average value of c and φ.
𝐶 𝐻 +𝐶 𝐻 +𝐶 𝐻
𝐶 =
𝐻 +𝐻 +𝐻
𝐻 tan 𝜙 + 𝐻 tan 𝜙 + 𝐻 tan 𝜙
𝜑 = 𝑡𝑎𝑛
𝐻 +𝐻 +𝐻
• The effective depth of interest will be limited to B. If B is yet to be
established, an iterative procedure may be adopted to obtain the
best average c and φ values.
14
14-09-2023
Determine the ultimate capacity of a strip footing of 1.5 m wide, with its
base at a depth of 1 m, resting on a dry sand stratum. Take γ = 17 kN/m3, φ́
= 38 degree. Use Terzaghi’s theory. If the footing is resting on a sand
stratum with φ́ = 32 degree, determine the ultimate bearing capacity using
Terzaghi’s theory. If the ground water table is located at 0.5 m below the
base of the footing, determine the ultimate bearing capacity of the footing.
Take γsat = 20 kN/m3.
A chimney with rigid base 2.5 m square, is placed on a soil having
unconfined compression strength of 60 kPa and unit weight of 20 kN/m3.
The weight of the chimney is 60 kN. The chimney has a resultant wind load
of 19.5 kN acting parallel to one of the sides of the chimney at a height of
1.5 m above the GL. If the depth of the foundation is 1.5 m then determine
the FOS by using Meyerhof’s recommendations.
15
