Geotechnical Design I

ULS of shallow foundation

Dr. Y.M. Cheng

Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
http://www.cee.polyu.edu.hk/~ceymcheng/
 Ultimate limit state for shallow foundation

A foundation must satisfy: ULS and SLS.

For ULS, we define it in terms of the bearing capacity, i.e.,

ultimate pressure that a foundation can hold

For SLS, the settlement must be limited. Actually, settlement

is the most critical issue. If ultimate capacity is approached
(yield), settlement must be large. If settlement is small, the
system must be far from yield. So control of bearing capacity
can also control settlement, or vice versa.
 3 Types of failure mode for shallow foundation

General shear failure Local shear failure

Results based on about 1000 model

tests, with alternate layers of coloured
sand. Failure modes can be classified
into 3 major types

Punching failure
 Types of failure modes for shallow foundation
General Shear Failure Mode is the mode in which continuous failure surface
occur as illustrated in the diagram. Ultimately the state of plastic equilibrium is
fully developed through the soil above the failure surface. Upheaving of ground
will occur outside foundation. This mode occurs in soil of low compressibility, i.e.
dense or stiff soils

Local Shear Failure Mode is the mode in which there is significant compression
of the soil underneath the foundation but only partial development of the state of
plastic equilibrium. Failure surfaces do not reach the ground and only slight
upheaving is found. The failure is only associated with large displacement which is
not well defined

Punching Shear Failure Mode occurs when there is shearing failure in the
vertical direction along the edges of the foundation, causing large displacements.
This mode of failure occurs also in soil of low compressibility or pile foundation.

In Hong Kong, it is generally not preferred to put footing on loose sand. If

foundation has to be put on loose sand, modes (b) or modes (c) failure may take
place which is not preferred.
Experiments by Vesic (1973)
 Analysisasof
ABC=45+/2, qf isgeneral
major shear failure BG
bearing capacity
move up, hence horizontal
principal stress. Compared with stress is the major stress in BGF,
triaxial test hence BGF=45-/2

Special features of log-spiral curve CF: r()=r0e tan, r0=BC, r=BH

Angle between normal line to radial line and tangent to the curve is
always !!! CBF=90
 Exact solution for unit weight of soil=0
Move down, with vertical
Move up, with vertical strain,
strain, principal stress in
principal stress in horizontal
vertical direction
direction

Horizontal stress generated

from Poisson ratio, cause
upheave outside foundation

Log-spiral zone

p y x
characteristics : sin 2 2 R (sin( 2 ) cos( 2 ) )0
Rigorous S S S S
solution p y x
characteristics : sin 2 2 R (sin( 2 ) cos( 2 ) )0
S S S S

Failure mode from previous page can automatically come out from solution of this equation.
Log-spiral equation come out from PDE if =0.
 Reminder : Mohr-Coulomb relation

=c+ntan or Kp=1/Ka=(1+sin)/(1-sin ) or

Ka=tan2(45- /2)
3=1Ka-2cKa or Kp=tan2(45+ /2)=cot2(45- /2)

1=3Kp+2cKp Note - Conjugate pair of principal

stresses, always in pairs, at 90
All the three equations are the same, and can be derived from Mohr-Coulomb relation
 Assumptions in analysis of general shear failure

1. Weight of soil is negligible

2. 2D problem
3. Uniform soil conditions and properties
4. Change of geometry is negligible
5. Foundation load on ground surface
6. Ground surface is horizontal
 Analysis of ULS
EB is base line of radial zone, and EB=r0=B/2csc
Radial length is given by tan B

r ro e csc e tan

2
B 2 tan B tan
B ED cot e 2
Length AB cot DC e
2
2 2
Since soil is weightless, and horizontal stress in zone underneath the
foundation is minor stress, therefore, the uniform pressure on AB=

PAB q f Ka 2c Ka q f tan 2 2c tan

Note that it is qf

Uniform pressure on DC qKp 2c Kp

PDC q cot 2 2c cot

Note that it is q here

Conjugate pair of
stresses
 Analysis of moment equilibrium

Take moment about E, overturning moment is given by

2 2 2 2
1B B2 1 B B B
M AE qf qf MAB Pa cot qf c cot
2 2 8 2 2 8 4

Restoring moment
2
1 B
tan B2 tan
8 q cot e
2
M ED q cot e 2
2 2
2 2 2
1 B 2 tan B B
M DC Pp e q cot 2 e tan c cot e tan
2 2 8 4

cB 2 csc 2 tan

2 2
M BC c ds cos r c r d
2
e 1 r ro e tan
0 0 8 tan

For a UDL with a length L, the moment about one end is

LxL/2= L2/2
 For the log-spiral curve

r cos

Outstanding effective stress
vector in moment
equilibrium

Two components
combined
n and ntan combine to form a vector (r) pointing towards E.
Hence only c along the arc is effective. Resolve c ds to radial
and normal component, only c ds (ds=rd/cos ) is effective in
moment contribution. Lever arm is r cos , hence moment
contribution is c ds x r cos = cr2 d
 Analysis

Equating overturning and restoring moment

2 2
B2 B2 B2 B2 B
q cot e cB
cot e tan
q cot 2 e tan
2 tan
qf qf c cot
8 8 4 8 8 4
cB 2 csc 2 tan

8 tan
e 1
c csc 2 tan
q f c cot q cot e 2 tan
c cot e tan

2 tan
e
1

1 sin
q f q c cot e tan c cot or qf=cNc + qNq
1 sin

N q e tan tan 2 45 N c N q 1cot
2

Note that q is usually

To include the weight of soil, a third term 0.5BN is
due to buried depth of
added, so finally qf=cNc + qNq + 0.5BN
foundation
 Bearing capacity factors by Vesic (1973)

Exact value of Nr is a complicated relation which cannot be expressed

by a simple formula, and various researchers put forward simplified
expressions for this term. Nr=2(Nq+1)tan is used by Vesic and
adopted in GEO Guide in HK
 Some explanatory terms
For foundation below ground :
Imaginary ground
surface

Shear strength is
neglected
Weight of soil D is
taken as surcharge q

Eccentricity
M=Pe, so moment is transformed to eccentricity. A moment is equal to pure
vertical load + eccentricity in terms of static equivalence. For foundation
structural analysis, this is true if foundation stiffness is very high (rigid
foundation). For foundation with eccentricity, the foundation width and length is
assumed to be reduced by 2xeccentricity to effective width and length.
 Real foundations differ from the Prandtls solution in
Usually not 2D problem as length of foundation is finite and force
required for the two ends are not considered

the foundation may be buried below ground level. The use of a

surcharge term is not sufficient as the failure surface can go
beyond the imaginary ground level

the loading acting on the foundation may not be UDL

the ground outside the foundation or the foundation itself may not
be level

Limited to single material with constant unit weight and soil

parameters
 Corrections to Terzaghi Buisman equation

Depth factors Most foundations are buried below ground level and an
imaginary ground level taken at the base of the foundation is usually assumed
for analysis. The weight of the soil above this imaginary ground level is taken
as the surcharge term. The shear strength of soil between the imaginary and
actual ground level is considered by the depth factors. It is interesting to note
that depth factors are not included in GEO guide but are allowed to be used in
other countries.

Shape factors The derivation of general shear bearing capacity factors by

Prandtl assumed a 2D analysis. Actual foundations are 3D problems and this
can be considered by the adoption of shape correction factors.
 Corrections to Terzaghi Buisman equation
Inclination factors Most of the shallow foundation apply a near trapezoidal
pressure to ground which is different from the Prandtls assumption. Furthermore,
horizontal load from wind, soil or water may also be present. To allow for this,
effective length and breadth are defined according to figure

For horizontal load Qs, if the load aligns along the short direction (B), the factor
m is defined as mB = (2+B/L)/(1+B/L).
If the horizontal load align along the long direction (L), the factor m is defined as
mL=(2+L/B)/(1+L/B).
For an arbitrary oriented horizontal force (resultant value), m is defined as
m=mLcos2+mBsin2.

Tilt factors If the foundation itself is not level, this factor is applied.

Ground slope factors If the ground slope at an angle immediately outside the
foundation, the ground slope factors can be applied. If the foundation is located at
a distance b from the edge of the slope, an approximate method is shown below.
 Extract from p. 45 of GEO Publication 1/2006

3D problem, apply
for nearly all cases

Apply when there is

horizontal loads
 Extract from GEO Publication 1/2006

Foundation is not
horizontal

Ground surface is
not horizontal

Depth factors allowed in other countries

Moment on foundation is usually treated as eccentricity for treatment

B=B-2eB L=L-2eL in case of eccentricity
For horizontal load not align along L or B

Align along B

B Align along L

m mL cos mB sin
2 2

Note : L is always the long direction

 Complete equations

No depth factors are included in this equation as the beneficial effect of

foundation embedment is unreliable because of possible construction activities
in future (GEO, 1993). Note the use of B in the equation
 Effect of water
If water table is very low, neglect it.

If water table is very high, above the bottom of footing,

use effective density

If water table is at a depth less than B below footing, use

interpolation

dw
e ' ( m ' )
B

Allowable bearing capacity qa=(qu-q)/FS+q

Or qa=qu/FS, depends on different codes
 Examples 1

Depth of c=5 Virtual ground level is at

= 36
foundation bottom of footing
= 19 1.2 1.2
=1.5m

= 36 Nc = 50.55, Nq = 37.7, Nr = 56.2

37.7 1.2
Shape Sc 1 1.746 S q 1 tan 36 1 1.726 S r 1 0.4 1 0.6
50.55 1.2
B=Bf=L=Lf for square footing with no eccentricity

Note : q=19x1.5

qult = 5 50.55 1.746 + 19 1.5 37.7 1.726 + 0.5 19 1.2

56.2 0.6 = 441.3 +1854.5 + 384.4 = 2680.2 kPa
Vallowable = 2680.2x1.2x1.2/3=1286.5 kN
 Example 2 pile foundation
For a pile in clay, =0
D D
d c ' 1 0.4 tan 1 1.59 assume that 10
B B
Note : depth factor d is not used in GEO
B
S c ' 1 0. 2 1. 2 Guide, but used in other countries
L

qult = ( + 2) 1.59 1.2 Cu +q =9.8 C u +q say 9Cu

Nc=9, including shape and depth factors

For CPT test, qc is taken as similar to the qult

 Example 3
A square footing is 1.8 1.8 m and is loaded with an axial load of 1800 kN
and My = 450 kNm, Mx = 360 kNm. The footing depth D = 1.8m and soil
properties are: c = 20 kPa, = 36, = 18kN/ m3.

ey = 450/ 1800 = 0.25 m ex = 360/ 1800 = 0.2 m

B = 1.8 2 0.25 = 1.3m L = 1.8 2 0.2 = 1.4 m
= 36 Nc = 50.55, Nq = 37.7, N = 56.2

Shape Sc=1+37.7/50.55x1=1.746, Sq=1+tan36x1=1.727, Sr=1-0.4x1=0.6

qult = 20 50.55 1.746 + 1.8 18 37.7 1.727+ 0.5 18 1.3

56.2 0.6 = 4269.2 kPa

Vult =4269.2*1.3*1.4=7770 kN
Note the use of effective width
Square footing, 1m
Example 4
below ground 1.5 m

1m
20 B = 1.2 m

=36, c=5kPa, =18 kN/m3

According to GEOGUIDE 1 2nd edition. 1993, depth factor is not considered.

Assuming flat ground and far away from slope
Shape S c 1 37.5 1.746 Sq = 1 + tan 36 = 1.727 Sr = 1 0.4 = 0.6
50.55
qult = 5 50.55 1.746 + 18 37.7 1.727 + 0.5 18 1.2 56.2 0.6= 1977.4 kPa

At edge of sloping ground, q=0 = slope angle=20=0.349 in radian

gc = exp ( -2 0.349 tan 36) = 0.602 gq = gr = (1 tan 20)2 = 0.405

qf = 5 50.55 1.746 0.602 + 0.5 18 1.2 56.2 0.6 0.405 = 413.2 kPa
1977.4 413.2
qf = 413.2 + 2.747 1.5 = 1293 kPa (simple interpolation)
4.8 2.747
(4.8=4B, 2.747=d cot )
Method for sloping ground from p. 47 of GEO Guide 1/2006

(4.8,1977.4)

(-2.747,413.2)
Bearing capacity from Code of Practice for foundation 2013, BD (draft)

Allowable values, no need to divide

by FOS
QUESTIONS