VGB Chapter 4: Shallow Foundations: Ukimate Bearing Capacity In this case, the factor + in the last term of the bearing capacity equations must be replaced by the factor a ¥te0-y) (4.25) ‘The preceding modifications are based on the assumption that there is no seepage force in the soil. Case Ill, When the water table is located so that d = B, the water will have no effect on the ultimate bearing capacity 4.6 The General Bearing Capacity Equation ‘The ultimate bearing capacity equations (4.8), (4.17), and (4.18) are for continuous, square, and circular foundations only; they do not address the case of rectangular founda- tions (0 < B/L < 1), Also, the equations do not take into account the shearing resistance along the failure surface in soil above the bottom of the foundation (the portion of the failure surface marked as G/ and HJ in Figure 4.6). In addition, the load on the foundation may be inclined. To account for all these shortcomings, Meyerhof (1963) suggested the following form of the general bearing capacity equation: a= NEE caFcs + IN GFF gil g + YBN GE gE yl (4.26) In this equation: c! = cohesion q ~ efiective stress at the level of the bottom of the foundation ‘y= unit weight of soil B = width of foundation (= diameter for a circular foundation) Pay Py = shape factors Fas Fyas Fyg = depth factors P Fg, Fyy Fj = load inclination factors N.,Ny N, = bearing capacity factors ‘The equations for determining the various factors given in Eq, (4.26) are described briefly in the sections that follow. Note that the original equation for ultimate bearing capacity is derived only for the plane-strain case (i.¢., for continuous foundations). The shape, depth, and load inclination factors are empirical factors based on experi- mental data It is important to recognize the fact that, in the case of inclined loading on a founda- tion, Eq, (4.26) provides the vertical component. opal ening ADR Reed May cpl ond pd rtp Dt nh ae i pcm bene ie Bo ag eee in en es may eo ng peo Caps ering sb me ae aang He eae46 The General Bearing Capacity Equation 169 Bearing Capacity Factors ‘The basic nature of the failure surface in soil suggested by Terzaghi now appears to have been bore out by laboratory and field studies of bearing capacity (Vesic, 1973). However, the angle « shown in Figure 4.6 is closer to 45 + '/2 than to o'. If this change is accepted, the values of N,, N,, and N, for a given soil friction angle will also change from those given in Table 4.1. With a = 45 + '/2, it can be shown that N,= tan? (ss + s) ere azn and N.= W,~ Deot 6! 428) Equation (4.28) for N, was originally derived by Prandtl (1921), and Eq. (4.27) for N, was presented by Reissner (1924). Caquot and Kerisel (1953) and Vesic (1973) gave the relation for N, as 2(N, + 1)tan $ (4.29) Table 4.2 shows the variation of the preceding bearing capacity factors with soil friction angles. Table 4.2 Bearing Capacity Factors “ Ne ™ N, e N uN N, 0 5.4 1.00 0.0016 11.63, 4343.06 1 5.38 109 0077 1234 477353 2 5.63 120 ols 18 13.10 526 407 3 5.90 131 02m 19 13.93, 580 468 4 6.19 143 03420 14.83, 640539 5 649 137 04s 21 1582 707-620 6 681 172 os? 22 16.88 7820 18 7 7.16 188 on 18.05 866 820 8 753 2.06 0864 19.32 960 944 9 792 225 10325 20.72 10.66 10.88 10 8.35 247 122 26 22.28 Nss 1254 1 8.80 an 144027 23.94 1320 1447 12 28 297 169% 25.80 1472 16.72 B 981 3.26 19729 27.86 1644 1934 141037 359 229 30 30.14 1840 22.40 15 10.98 3.94 265 3 32.67 20.63 25.99 (continued) opal ening ADR Reed May cpl ond pd rtp Dt nh ae i pcm bene ie Bo ag eee in en es may eo ng peo Caps ering sb me ae aang He eae¥70 Chapter 4: Shallow Foundations: Ultimate Bearing Capacity Table 4.2 Bearing Capacity Factors (Continued) “ ™ yy %, . ™. ™, N, 3235492818 3022 9371 3538 15555 333864 (26,09 3519 43 10S.AL 99.02 186.54 344216 (29.44 4106 44118371131. 228.64 3546123330 4803 4S S3BB 3488 DTG 36 5059 37.75 S631 46 152.10 SRST. 330.35 3755634292 6619 «4717364 187.21 408.67 386135 «48.93 7803 «4819926 © -222.31—«496.01 396787 S5.96 9.25 49229936551 «GI3.AG 40° 7531 6420-10941 «50,265.89 319.07 762.89 41 8386 73:90——«130.22 Shape, Depth, and Inclination Factors ‘Commonly used shape, depth, and inclination factors are given in Table 4.3, Table 4.2 Shape, Depth and Inclination Factors (DeBeer (1970); Hansen (1970); Meyerhof (1963); ‘Meyerhof and Hanna (1981)] Factor Relationship Reference Shape DeBeer (1970) E, Depth Hansen (1970) pleco ening ADR Reed May cpl ond pd tpt nh ae i pcm bene eo ag ‘toa a oy men ar ap wry gos Cony Lanne es nim cm amen ig ge46 The General Bearing Capacity Equation 171 Table 4.3 Shape, Depth and Inclination Factors [DeBeer (1970); Hansen (1970); Meyerhof (1963); Meyerhof and Hanna (1981)] (Continued) Factor Relationship Reference For $ = Dy) 3) Inclination Meyethof (1963); Hanna and Meyerhof (1981) {B = inclination of the load on the foundation with respect to the vertical Example 4.3 Solve Example Problem 4.1 using Eq. (4.26), Solution From Eq. (4.26), 1 = ONE PadB a + ON Eg lg + 5 YBN FE Since the load is vertical, F., = Fy NN, = 10.66, and N, = 10.88. Using Table 4.3, ‘B\(Na 2\/ 10.66 +({=))=1+ (=f tw, 2)\2072 1+ (2Joma=t + (Pans 146 rte npn linet Da ca vn ty ten pen ek se Sag. ecw sons Cap tein ree ann sly iene ir ne From Table 4,2 for ¢’ = 25°, N, = 20.72, = 1514 pie cage Leng ADR Reed May tbe ona iy men ar mamofo) Fyg = 1 + 2tan 6! (1 = sin oo?) = 1 + (2)(tan 25)(1 — sin 22) = 1.233 I= Fy 11.233 ~ Naan” te (20.72)(tan S| Meo) Hence, 4a ~ (20)(20.72)(1.514)(1.257)(1) + (LS X 16.5)(10.66)(1.466)(1.233)(1) + das 5)(2)(10.88)(0.6)(1)(1) = 788.6 + 476.9 + 107.7 = 1373.2 KN/m* 4 _ 1373.2 FS 3 Q = (457.1) X 2) = 1830.8 KN . qu = 157.7 KN/m? Example 4.4 ‘A square foundation (B X B) has to be constructed as shown in Figure 4.10. Assume that -y = 105 Ib/f, yu = 118 Ib/ft, sp’ = 34°, D,= 4 ft, and D, = 2 ft. The gross allowable Toad, Quy, with FS = 3 is 150,000 Ib. Determine the size of the foundation, Use Eq. (4.26), BXB A square foundation bce ond tp ne tet nh ae i pc my bmp te os ye eames Catv rr ews net ny ices iar nr173 We have = 2a 00g Be B da Thy @ From Eq. (4.26) (with c’ = 0), for vertical loading, we obtain = Lanes + ; YBN Fy) 29.44 and Ny, 41.06, Hence, B 1+ Fran! = 1+ tan 34 B F,=1-04(2) = 1-04-06 D, Fy =1+2tang(l- sine’? 5 1+ 2tan 34(1— sin 34h = 1+ = Fri and q = (2)(105) + 2(118 — 62.4) = 321.2 lb/ft So (621.2)(29.44)(1 oat + +8) + (Ja 18 — 62.4)(B)(41.06)(0. | (b) = 5263.9 +> a 228.38 Combining Eqs. (a) and (b) results in 150,000 5263.9 + 25271 ar = 5265 + 228.38 By trial and error, we find that B ~ 4.5 ftV74_ Chapter 4: Shallow Foundations: Utimate Bearing Capacity Example 4.5 A square column foundation (Figure 4.11) is to be constructed on a sand deposit. The allowable load Q will be inclined at an angle 8 = 20° with the vertical. The standard penetration numbers Ngo obtained from the field are as follows, Depth (om 1s 30 45 60 78 9.0 y= 18 kNim — a Figure 4.11 Determine Q. Use FS = . Eq, (3.29), and Bq, (4,26) Solution From Eq, (3.29), $' (deg) = 27.1 + 0.3 ~ 0.00054(N ga)? The following is an estimation of in the field using Eq, (3.29) Depth (m) " (dea) 15 28 3.0 29 4s 30 60 30 15 30 90 29 29.4" = 30° ‘With c’ = 0, the ultimate bearing capacity [Eq. (4.26)] becomes 1 Ga = NF gE dP + 5 YBN Fy Pay 4 = (0.7)(18) = 12.6 KN/m* y= 18kN/m? pie cage Leng ADR Reed May tbe ona iy men ar ma rte npn linet Da ca vn ty ten pen ek se Sag. ecw sons Cap tein ree ann sly iene ir ne47 Other Solutions for Bearing Capacity Ny, Shape, and Depth Factors. 175 From Table 4.2 for ¢' = 30°, From Table 4.3, (Note: B = L) + (Bune =14+0577=1577 L, B o4(2) -06 D, (0.289)(0. Fy 1+ Quang sing S = 1 + COD 1.162 Hence, iu = (12.6)(18.4)(1.577)(1.162)(0.605) + (FJasa2nee 4)(0.6)(1)(0.11) = 273.66 kN/m? Ge 273.66 a a> gg O22 NI Now, Q cos 20 = qq, B* = (91.22)(1.25)* Q~151.7kN . 4.7 Other Solutions for Bearing Capacity Ny, Shape, and Depth Factors Bearing Capacity Factor, Ny ‘The bearing capacity factor, N,, given in Eq. (4.29) will be used in this text. There are, however, several other solutions that can be found in the literature. Some of those solutions are given in Table 4.4. opal ening ADR Reed May cpl ond pd rtp Dt nh ae i pcm bene ie Bo ag ‘toa oy men ar ap wry gos Cony nine es im cm amen i geV7B_ Chapter 4: Shallow Foundations: Ultimate Bearing Capacity Table 4.4 N, Relationships Investigator Relationship Meyerho (1963) N,=(N,— Dtan 146 Hansen (1970) N, = 15(N, = I)tan 6" Biarez, (1961) N, = 1.8(N, ~ I)tan Booker (1969) N= 0.1045" (6" isin radians) Michalowski (1997) Noa e065 006 tang Hija etal (2005) N= oer 3020895 an Martin (2005) Ny = (N, ~ 1) tan 1.326" Note: N, is given by Eq. (4.27) The variations of N, with soil friction angle ¢' for these relationships are given in Table 4.5. Table 4.5 Comparison of N, Values Provided by Various Investigators Soil friction angle, @’ Meyerhof Hansen —_Biarez_ Booker Michalowski ‘Hijiajet al. Martin (deg) (1963) (1970) (1961) _—(1969) (1997) (2005) (2005) 0 0.00 0 0.00 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 012 0.04 01 0.00 2 oon oo1 oon os 0.08 0.03 0.01 3 0.02 0.02 0.03 our 03 0.05 0.02 4 0.08 0.05 0.05 0.20 0.19 0.08 0.04 5 0.07 007 0.09 0.24 0.26 02 0.07 6 oul ol od 0.29 0.35 oly 0.10 7 os 0.16 019 0.34 04s 022 od 8 021 0.22 027 040 0.56 0.29 0.20 9 0.28 030 036 047 0.69 036 0.26 10 037 0.39 047 0.56 084 046 035 in OAT 050 0.60 0.66 101 056 044 2 0.60 0.63 0.76 0.78 1.22 0.69 0.56 B 0.75 0.79 0.94 092 145 084 0.70 4 092 097 116 1.09 172 101 087 15 13 118 142, 129 2.04 121 1.06 16 138 144 172 153 2.40 145 129 7 167 1B 2.08 181 2.82 172 1.56 18 2.01 2.08 2.49 214 3.30 2.05 1.88 opal ening ADR Reed May cpl ond pd rtp Dt nh ae i pcm bene ie Bo ag ‘toa oy men ar ap wry gos Cony nine es im cm amen i ge47 Other Solutions for Bearing Capacity Ny, Shape, and Depth Factors. 177 Table 4.5 Comparison of N, Values Provided by Various Investigators (Continued) Soil friction angle,’ Meyerhof Hansen Biarez_ Booker Michalowski —Hijiaj (eg) (1963) (1970) (1961) (1969) 1997) (2005) (2005) 19 241 248 2.98 2.52 3.86 2.42 2.25 20 288 2.95 3.54 299 451 2.86 2.69 21 343 3.50 420 3.53 527 3.38 3.20 2 4.07 414 497 447 614 3.98 3.80 2B 484 439) 587 494 147 4.69 4.50 24 573 5.76 691 5.84 8.36 51 532 25 6.78 6.7 8.13 6.90 915 648 6.29 26 8.02 7.96 9.55 8.16 1137 763 7143 27 9.49 9.38 11.22 9.65 13.28 897 877 28 11.22 10.97 13.16 1141 15.52 1057 10.35 29 13.27 12.87 15.45 13.50 18.15 12.45 12.22 30 15.71 ASL 18.13 15.96 21.27 14.68 14.44 31 18,62 17.74 21.29 18.87 24.95 17.34 17.07 32 22,09 20.85 25.02 2231 29.33 2051 20.20 3 26.25 24.52 29.42 26.39 34.55 24.30 23.94 34 31.25 28,86 34.64 31.20 40.79 28.86 28.41 35 37.28 34.03 40.84 36.90 48.28 34.34 33.79 36 44.58 40.19 48.23 43.63 S731 40.98 40.28 37 53.47 4155 57.06 51.59 68.22 49.03 48.13 38 64.32, 56.38 67.65 61.00 81.49 58.85 57.67 39 T1064 67.01 80.41 7214 97.69 7087 69.32 40 94.09 79.85 95.82 85.30 1787 85.67 83.60 41 114.49 9544 1145310087 142.09 103.97 101.21 2 139.96 144413733 119.28 1251 126.75 123.04 43 17197 137.71 165.25 AdL.04 210.49 195.25 150.26 44 212.47 166.34 199.61 166.78 258.21 191.13 184.40 45 264.13, 20178 = 242.13 197.21 318.57 236.63, 227.53 Shape and Depth Factors The shape and depth factors given in Table 4.3 recommended, respectively, by DeBeer (1970) and Hansen (1970) will be used in this text for solving problems. Many geotechnical engineers presently use the shape and depth factors proposed by Meyerhof (1963). These are given in Table 4.6. More recently, Zhu and Michalowski (2005) evaluated the shape factors based on the elastoplastic model of soil and finite element analysis. They are P= 1+ (18 tan*g! + on(2) (430) opal ening ADR Reed May cpl ond pd rtp Dt nh ae i pcm bene ie Bo ag eee in en es may eo ng peo Caps ering sb me ae aang He eae178 Chapter 4: Shallow Foundations: Ulimate Bearing Capacity Tabel 4.6 Meyerhof's Shape and Depth Factors pie cage Leng ADR Reed May tbe ona iy men ar ma 4.8 Factor Shape For$ Ky 14028) Fy = Fy 1 Ford’ = lo", Fa 1 +02 BA) a's + $12) Ey 1+ 0.1 BL) tan'(4S + $'2) Depth For b= Fa 140208) Foum Ba 1 For d= 108 Fa 10.2 DB) tan 4s + 6'2) Fyn 140.1 D/B) tan (45 + 4°22) 0s 1+ sorn'e' (2) aan — 2g! B e309 = 1+ 06tan'4’—0.25)[7) (lor g’ < 30 (432) and Ls + (13 an'd! = s(£) eo H8E (for §” > 30°) (4.33) Equations (4.30) through (4.33) have been derived based on sound theoretical background and may be used for bearing capacity calculation. Case Studies on Ultimate Bearing Capacity In this section, we will consider two field observations related to the ultimate bearing capacity of foundations on soft clay. The failure loads on the foundations in the field will bbe compared with those estimated from the theory presented in Section 4.6. Foundation Failure of a Concrete Silo ‘An excellent case of bearing capacity failure of a 6-m (20-ft) diameter concrete silo ‘was provided by Bozozuk (1972). The concrete tower silo was 21 m (70 ft) high and ‘was constructed over soft clay on a ring foundation, Figure 4.12 shows the variation of the rte npn linet Da ca vn ty ten pen ek se Sag. ecw sons Cap tein ree ann sly iene ir ne