Shallow Foundations

Bearing Capacity
Introduction
2 /50
o Shallow foundations must satisfy various performance
requirements and one of them is the bearing capacity (strength
requirement)

o Since shallow foundations induce loads the near-surface soils, it
induces both compressive and shear stresses in the soils

o The magnitudes of these stresses depend largely on the bearing
pressure and the size of the footing

o If the bearing pressure is large enough, or the footing is small
enough, the shear stresses may exceed the shear strength of the
soil or rock that will result in a bearing capacity failure.
Bearing Capacity Failures
3 /50
o general shear failure

o local shear failure

o punching shear failure
General Shear Failure
o Most common mode of failure

o occurs in soils that are relatively incompressible
and reasonably strong, in rock, and in saturated,
normally consolidated clays that are loaded rapidly
enough that the undrained condition prevails

o the failure surface is well defined and failure
occurs quite suddenly

o a clearly formed bulge appears on the ground
surface adjacent to the foundation

o Ultimate failure occurs on one side only and is
often accompanied by rotation of the foundation
Load displacement curve for general
shear failure
general shear failure
Local Shear Failure
o is an intermediate case

o shear surfaces are well defined under the
foundation, but vague near the ground
surface

o a small bulge may occur, but considerable
settlement, perhaps on the order of half the
foundation width, is necessary before a clear
surface forms near the ground

o sudden failure does not occur

o The footing just continues to sink into the
ground
Load displacement curve for local shear failure
local shear failure
Punching Shear Failure
o opposite extreme

o occurs in very loose sands, in a thin crust of
strong soil underlain by very weak soil, or in
weak clays loaded under, slow drained
conditions

o the high compressibility of the soil causes
large settlements and poorly defined
vertical shear surfaces

o little or no bulging occurs at the ground
surface and failure develops gradually
Load displacement curve for
Punching shear failure
punching shear failure
Vesis investigation
o Vesic investigated these three modes of
failure by conducting load tests on model
circular foundations in sand

o shallow foundations (D/B < 2) can fail in any
of the three modes

o deep foundations (D/B > 4) are always
governed by punching shear

o The results show a general relationship
between the mode of failure, relative
density, and the D/B ratio.
Modes of failure of model circular
foundations in Chattahoochee Sand
Bearing Capacity Failures
o The following guidelines are helpful to determine which of the three
modes of failure will govern
Shallow foundations in rock and undrained clays are governed by the
general shear case

Shallow foundations in dense sands are governed by the general shear
case. In this context, a dense sand is one with a relative density, D
r
,
greater than about 67%

Shallow foundations on loose to medium sands (30% < D
r
< 67%) are
probably governed by local shear

Shallow foundations on very loose sand (D
r
< 30%) are probably
governed by punching shear
Bearing Capacity Analyses in Soil
General Shear Case
o To be able to analyze and design spread footings, we must
understand the relationship between bearing capacity, load, footing
dimensions and soil properties

o The relationships have been studied using different approaches
such as:
assessments of the performance of real foundation, including full-scale
load tests

load tests on model footings

limit equilibrium analyses

detailed stress analyses, such as FEM analyses
Simple Bearing Capacity Formula
Bearing capacity analysis along a circular
failure surface
Consider a continuous footing
a. assume this footing experiences a bearing
capacity failure

b. failure occurs along a circular shear surface

c. soil is an undrained clay (f = 0)with a shear
strength s
u

d. neglect the shear strength between the
ground surface and a depth D

e. soil in this zone is considered to be only
surcharge load that produces a vertical
total stress of s
zD
= gD at a depth D.
Simple Bearing Capacity Formula
Bearing capacity analysis along a circular
failure surface
Take moments about Point A





Define a new parameter, called a bearing
capacity factor, N
c




The above equation is known as the bearing
capacity formula where N
c
= 2p = 6.28.
Terzaghis Bearing Capacity Formulas
Assumptions of Terzaghis bearing capacity
formulas
o the D B
o no sliding occurs between the foundation and
the soil
o the soil beneath the foundation is a
homogeneous semi-infinite mass
o s = c + stanf
o the general shear mode of failure governs
o no consolidation of the soil occurs
o the foundation is very rigid in comparison to the soil
o the soil between the ground surface and a depth D has no shear
strength, and serves only as a surcharge load
o applied load is compressive and applied vertically to the centroid of
the foundation and no applied moment loads are present
Geometry of failure surface for Terzaghis bearing
capacity formulas
Terzaghis Bearing Capacity Formulas
Assumptions of Terzaghis bearing capacity
formulas
o three zones were considered
wedge zone remains intact and moves
downward with the foundation

radial shear zone extends from each
size of the wedge and the shape of the
shear planes are logarithmic spirals

linear shear zone the soil shears along
planar surfaces
Geometry of failure surface for Terzaghis bearing
capacity formulas
Terzaghis Bearing Capacity Formulas
o for square foundations


o for continuous foundations


o for circular foundations
q
ult
= ultimate bearing capacity
c = effective cohesion for soil beneath foundation
f = friction angle for soil beneath foundation
s
zD
= vertical effective stress at depth D below the ground
surface
g = effective unit weight of the soil if groundwater table
is very deep
D = depth of foundation below ground surface
B = width (or diameter) of foundation
N
c
, N
q
, N
g
= Terzaghis bearing capacity factors = f(f)
Bearing Capacity Factors

f
(deg)
TERZAGHI
(Eq. 6.4 to 6.6)
VESI
(Eq. 6.13)
N
c
N
q
N
g
N
c
N
q
N
g
0 5.7 1.0 0.0 5.1 1.0 0.0
1 6.0 1.1 0.1 5.4 1.1 0.1
2 6.3 1.2 0.1 5.6 1.2 0.2
3 6.6 1.3 0.2 5.9 1.3 0.2
4 7.0 1.5 0.3 6.2 1.4 0.3
5 7.3 1.6 0.4 6.5 1.6 0.4
6 7.7 1.8 0.5 6.8 1.7 0.6
7 8.2 2.0 0.6 7.2 1.9 0.7
8 8.6 2.2 0.7 7.5 2.1 0.9
9 9.1 2.4 0.9 7.9 2.3 1.0
10 9.6 2.7 1.0 8.3 2.5 1.2
Terzaghi bearing capacity factors
Example Problem
A square footing is to be
constructed as shown. The
groundwater table is at a depth of
50 ft. below the ground surface.
Compute the ultimate bearing
capacity and the column load
required to produce a bearing
capacity failure.


f
(deg)
Terzaghi
(Eq. 6.4 to 6.6)
Vesic
(Eq. 6.13)
N
c
N
q
N
g
N
c
N
q
N
g
30 37.2 22.5 20.1 30.1 18.4 22.4
31 40.4 25.3 23.7 32.7 20.6 26.0
32 44.0 28.5 28.0 35.5 23.2 30.2
Example Problem
The proposed continuous footing shown
will support the exterior wall of a new
industrial building. The underlying soil is
an undrained clay, and the groundwater
table is below the bottom of the footing.
Compute the ultimate bearing capacity,
and compute the wall load required to
cause a bearing capacity failure.

f
(deg)
TERZAGHI
(Eq. 6.4 to 6.6)
VESI
(Eq. 6.13)
N
c
N
q
N
g
N
c
N
q
N
g
0 5.7 1.0 0.0 5.1 1.0 0.0
1 6.0 1.1 0.1 5.4 1.1 0.1
2 6.3 1.2 0.1 5.6 1.2 0.2
0.2 m
0.2 m
Vesis Bearing Capacity Formulas
o Skempton (1951)
o Meyerhof (1953)
o Brinch Hansen (1961)
o DeBeer and Ladanyi (1961)
o Meyerhof (1963)
o Brinch Hansen (1970)
o Vesi (1973,1975)
developed formulas based on theoretical and experimental findings
excellent alternative to Terzaghi
produces more accurate bearing values
applies to a much broader range of loading and geometry
conditions
Vesis Bearing Capacity Formulas
o Vesi retained Terzaghis basic format
and added the following additional
factors:
s
c
, s
q
, s
g
= shape factors
d
c
, d
q
, d
g
= depth factors
i
c
, i
q
, i
g
= load inclination factors
b
c
, b
q
, b
g
= base inclination factors
g
c
, g
q
, g
g
= ground inclination factors

o so that the bearing capacity formula is
re-written as


Notation for Vesics load inclination, base
inclination, and ground inclination factors. All
angles are expressed in degrees
Vesis Shape Factors
For continuous footings, B/L 0, so s
c
, s
q
, s
g
= 1.

Vesis Depth Factors
o for relatively shallow foundations (D/B 1), use k = D/B.
o for deeper footings (D/B > 1), use k = tan
-1
(D/B)


Vesis Load Inclination Factors
o i factors are 1 if load acts perpendicular to the base of the footing
o i factors are 1 when f = 0
V = applied shear load
P = applied normal load
A = base area of footing
c = effective cohesion (use c = s
u
for undrained analyses)
f = effective friction angle (use f = 0
u
for undrained analyses)
B = foundation width
L = foundation length
For loads inclined in the B direction:




For loads inclined in the L direction:

Vesis Base Inclination Factors
o if the base of the footing is level, which is the usual case, all b
factors are equal to 1.
Vesis Ground Inclination Factors

= 1

147
0

o if the ground surface is level (b= 0) the g factors are equal to 1.

= 1
2

Vesis Bearing Capacity Factors

tan 45+

= 5.14
For f > 0
For f = 0

= 2

+1

o Vesic used the following formulas for computing the bearing
capacity factors N
q
and N
c
:
Vesic recommended the following formula
for Ng
Summary
o Bearing capacity failure occurs when the soil beneath
the footing fails in shear

o There are three types of bearing capacity failures:
general shear failure
local shear failure
punching shear failure

o Most bearing capacity analyses for shallow foundations
consider only the general shear case
Seatwork
A 1.2 m square, 0.4-m deep spread footing is underlain by a soil with
the following properties:
g = 19.2 kN/m
3
c = 5 kPa
f = 30
o

The groundwater is at a great depth.

ID nos. ending in an ODD No.
Compute the ultimate bearing capacity using TERZAGHIs method

ID nos. ending in an EVEN No.
Compute the ultimate bearing capacity using VESIs method
Seatwork
A 5-ft wide, 8 ft. long, 2 ft. deep spread footing is underlain
by a soil with the following properties:

g = 120 lb/ft
3
c = 100 lb/ft
2
f = 28
o

The groundwater is at a great depth. using VESIs method,
compute the column load required to cause a bearing
capacity failure.
Seatwork
A 1.5-m wide, 2.5 m. long, 0.6 m. deep spread footing is
underlain by a soil with the following properties:

g = 19 kN/m
3
c = 4.8 kN/m
2
f = 28
o

The groundwater is at a great depth. using VESIs method,
compute the column load required to cause a bearing
capacity failure.
Groundwater Effects
o The presence of shallow groundwater affects shear
strength in two ways:

Reduction of apparent cohesion

Increase in pore water pressure

o Both of these affect bearing capacity, and thus need to
be considered
Groundwater Effects
Three groundwater cases for bearing analyses
CASE I CASE 2 CASE 3
NOTE: If a total stress analysis is being performed, do not apply groundwater correction
because the groundwater effects are supposedly implicit within the values of C
T
and f
T
.
Example Problem
A 30-m by 50-m foundation is to
be built as shown in the figure.
Compute the ultimate bearing
capacity.


f
(deg)
Terzaghi
(Eq. 6.4 to 6.6)
Vesic
(Eq. 6.13)
N
c
N
q
N
g
N
c
N
q
N
g
30 37.2 22.5 20.1 30.1 18.4 22.4
31 40.4 25.3 23.7 32.7 20.6 26.0
32 44.0 28.5 28.0 35.5 23.2 30.2
Solution

f
(deg)
Vesic
(Eq. 6.13)
N
c
N
q
N
g
30 30.1 18.4 22.4
31 32.7 20.6 26.0
32 35.5 23.2 30.2
Allowable Bearing Capacity
To obtain the allowable bearing capacity, q
a
, the ultimate
bearing capacity is divided by a factor of safety




where
q
a
= allowable bearing capacity
q
ult
= ultimate bearing capacity
F = factor of safety

The foundation is then designed so that the bearing pressure, q,
does not exceed the allowable bearing capacity, q
a
.

Allowable Bearing Capacity
o Soil Type

o Site characterization data

o Soil variability

o Importance of the structure and the consequences of a
failure

o The likelihood of the design load ever actually occurring
Allowable Bearing Capacity
o Soil Type

o Site characterization data

o Soil variability

o Importance of the structure and the
consequences of a failure

o The likelihood of the design load ever
actually occurring

o Design F - Extreme Values
Typical Range
Sand Clay

Extensive Minimal

Uniform Erratic

Low High


Low High


2.0 4.0
2.5 3.5

Factors affecting the design factor of safety, and typical values of F.
Allowable Bearing Capacity
The true factor of safety is probably much greater than the design
factor of safety, due to the following:
o The shear strength data are normally interpreted conservatively, so
the design values of c and f implicitly contain another factor of
safety.

o The service loads are probably less than the design loads

o Settlement, not bearing capacity, often controls the final design, so
the footing will likely be larger than that required to satisfy bearing
capacity criteria.

o Spread footings are commonly built somewhat larger than the plan
dimensions.
Example Problem
A column has the following design vertical loads: P
D
= 300 k, P
L
=
140 k, P
W
= 160 k will be supported on a spread footing located 3
ft. below the ground surface. The underlying soil has an
undrained shear strength of 2000 lb/ft
2
and a unit weight of 109
lb/ft
3
. The groundwater table is at a depth of 4 ft. Determine the
minimum required footing width to maintain a factor of safety of
3 against a bearing capacity failure (use Terzaghis method).

f
(deg)
TERZAGHI
(Eq. 6.4 to 6.6)
VESI
(Eq. 6.13)
N
c
N
q
N
g
N
c
N
q
N
g
0 5.7 1.0 0.0 5.1 1.0 0.0
1 6.0 1.1 0.1 5.4 1.1 0.1
2 6.3 1.2 0.1 5.6 1.2 0.2
Design Loads
ASD design load combinations [ANSI/ASCE 2.4.1]
o D
o D + L + F + H + T + (L
r
or S or R)
o D + L + (L
r
or S or R) + (W or E)
o D + (W or E)

Alternate method of evaluating wind and seismic loads
o 0.75[D + L + (L
r
or S or R) + (W or E)]
o 0.75[D + (W or E)]

Bearing Capacity on Layered Soils
Many soil profiles are not uniform. To compute the bearing
capacity of foundation on soils where c, f and g vary with
depth, we can use three methods:
o Evaluate the bearing capacity using the lowest values of c,
f and g in the zone between the bottom of the foundation
and a depth B below the bottom.
this is the zone where bearing capacity failures occur
this method is conservative
however many design problems are controlled by
settlement, so a conservative bearing capacity analysis
may be the simplest and easiest solution
Bearing Capacity on Layered Soils
o use weighted average values of c, f and g based on
the relative thickness of each stratum in the zone
between the bottom of the footing and a depth B
below the bottom
this method could be both conservative and
unconservative
provides acceptable results as long as the
differences in the strength parameters are not too
great
Bearing Capacity on Layered Soils
o consider a series of trial failure surfaces beneath the
footing and evaluate the stresses on each surface using
methods employed in slope stability analyses.
the surface that produces the lowest value of q
ult
is
the critical failure surface
most precise but also requires the most effort to
implement
appropriate only for critical projects on complex soil
profiles
Example Problem
Using the second method,
compute the factor of safety
against a bearing capacity failure
in the square footing shown.

f
(deg)
TERZAGHI
(Eq. 6.4 to 6.6)
VESI
(Eq. 6.13)
N
c
N
q
N
g
N
c
N
q
N
g
33 48.1 32.2 33.3 38.6 26.1 35.2
34 52.6 36.5 39.6 42.2 29.4 41.1
35 57.8 41.4 47.3 46.1 33.3 48.0
Evaluations of bearing capacity failures
on saturated clays (Bishop and Bjerrum, 1960)

Locality
Clay Properties

Computed
Factor of
Safety F Moisture
content, w

Liquid
limit, w
L
Plastic
limit, w
P
Plasticity
index, I
P
Liquidity
index, I
L
Loading test, Marmorera 10 35 15 20 -0.25 0.92
Kensal Green 1.02
Silo, Transcona 50 110 30 80 0.25 1.09
Kippen 50 70 28 42 0.52 0.95
Screw pile, Lock Ryan 1.05
Screw pile, Newport 1.07
Oil tank, Fredrikstad 45 55 25 30 0.67 1.08
Oil tank A, Shellhaven 70 87 25 62 0.73 1.03
Oil tank B, Shellhaven 1.05
Silo, US 40 20 35 1.37 0.98
Loading test, Moss 9 16 8 1.39 1.10
Loading test, Hagalund 68 55 19 18 1.44 0.93
Loading test, Torp 27 24 0.96
Loading test, Rygge 45 37 0.95
Evaluations of bearing capacity failures
on saturated clays (Bishop and Bjerrum, 1960)
Results of static load tests on full-sized spread footings
(Adapted from Briaud and Gibbens, 1994)
Seatwork
A column carrying a vertical downward dead load and live
load of 150 k and 120 k, respectively, is to be supported on a
3-ft deep square spread footing.

The soil beneath this footing is an undrained clay with s
u
=
3000 lb/ft
2
and g = 117 lb/ft
3
. The groundwater table is
below the bottom of the footing.

Compute the width B required to obtain a factor of safety of
3 against a bearing capacity failure.
Seatwork
A 120-ft diameter cylindrical tank with an empty weight of
1,900,000 lb. (including the weight of the cylindrical mat
foundation) is to be built. The bottom of the mat will be at a
depth of 2 ft. below the ground surface.

This tank is to be filled with water. The underlying soil is an
undrained clay with s
u
= 1000 lb/ft
2
and g = 118 lb/ft3, and the
groundwater table is at a depth of 5 ft.

Using Terzaghis equations, compute the maximum allowable
depth of the water in the tank that will maintain a factor of safety
of 3.0 against a bearing capacity failure. Assume the weight of the
water and tank is spread uniformly across the bottom of the tank.
Summary
o there are several formulas to compute the ultimate
bearing capacity, q
ult
. These are Terzaghi and Vesics
formulas.

o Shallow GWTs reduce the effective stress in the near-
surface soils and can therefore adversely affect bearing
capacity. Adjustment factors are available to account for
this effect.

o The allowable bearing capacity, q
a
, is the ultimate
bearing capacity divided by a factor of safety. The
bearing pressure, q, must not exceed q
a
.
Summary
o Bearing capacity analyses should be based on the worst-
case soil conditions that are likely to occur during the life
of the structure.

o Bearing capacity analyses on sands and gravels are
normally based on the effective stress parameters, c and
f. However, those on saturated clays are normally based
on the undrained strength, s
u
.
Summary
o Bearing capacity computations may be performed for
local and punching shear cases. These analyses use
reduced values of c and f.

o Bearing capacity analyses on layered soils are more
complex because the values of c and f for each layer
should be considered.

o Evaluations of foundation failures and static load tests
indicate the bearing capacity analysis methods in this
chapter are suitable for the practical design of shallow
foundations.