TEXAS TRANSPORTATION INSTITUTE TEXAS HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH THEORY, RESISTANCE OF A DRILLED SHAFT FOOTING TO OVERTURNING LOADS in cooperation with the Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration Bureau of Public Roads RESEARCH REPORT 105-1 STUDY 2-5-67-105 DESIGN OF FOOTINGS FOR MINOR SERVICE STRUCTURES ‘onaTHEORY, RESISTANCE OF A DRILLED SHAFT FOOTING TO OVERTURNING LOADS by Don L. Ivey Associate Research Engineer Research Report Number 105-1 Design of Footings for Minor Service Sti 5-67-105 Research Study Number Sponsored by THE TEXAS HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT in cooperation with ‘The U. S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration Bureau of Public Roads February, 1968 ‘TEXAS TRANSPORTATION INSTITUTE Texas A&M University College Station, TexasACKNOWLEDGMENTS ‘The theory described by this paper was developed as the initial phase of a study sponsored jointly by the Texas Highway Department and the Bureau of Public Roads, Liason was maintained through Mx. D. L. Hawkins and Mr. H. D. Buller, contact representatives for the Texas Highway Department, and through Mz. Robert J. Pro- chaska of the Bureau of Public Roads. ‘The opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed in this publication are those of the author and not necessarily those of the Bureau of Pui¢ Rods,INTRODUCTION ‘The wide use of drilled shaft footings to support service structures necessary for the functioning of a highway system has focused attention on the highly ssmsewotion flsian procedures presently in use. The foundations for siructutes suchas stow, boards, strain poles, and lighting poles skould be des consistent with the relative importance of the pasticul methods do not allow this since the real factor of safety y Sapetvative methods of analysis, The development of a reliable analysis technique will result in considerable economy through the use of reasonable factors of salcy ‘This is the first of a series of reports to be writen concerned with the design of these footings. It shows in detail the theoretical development on which the aie sequent reports will be based. The second report in this series will provide w cure Parison of the theory with model tests and the third report will present » “Tentaice resign Procedure” for the practicing engineer charged with the design of signboard and pole structures,Statement of Problem onsider the drilled shat foting of a cireular cross contr in Figure 1. The load that are of interest ection show atl loads and overturning moments at the a Oe he footing (atthe surface of the ground)” The 40 Sit Toad on the footing is not large enough to make vertical load jure mode a possbilty. Any combination Fe petal loads and overtaming moments can be ot porno a single load acting some distance above Teoirel f the footing. This treatment will be based on the 108 Saas of these footings to a horizontal losd (P) gt ete igance (Hl) above the top of the Tooting. Pits Ty es heat Ath fn arr the an le th ong ‘The plastic equilibrium condition is reached on various points of the footing at different degrees of rota- | tion, For example, the top of the footing would undergo the most lateral movement for a given rotation, thereby forcing the adjacent soil into the plastic flow condition first. This soll then yields as rotation continues with no further increase in stress. The soil at an increased depth, progressively closer to the point of rotation, goes through plastic equilibrium and into the plastic’ flow condition.’ Finally, (at maximum load) most of the adjacent to the advancing boundaries of the footing is ina state of plastic flow. |The forces developed on the footing are shown in Figure 2. ‘Most of the prior treatments of this problem have considered only the horizontal force, Fas and Fan which are the major forces resisting overturning. ‘These treatments have in general fallen into two groups; either highly empirical (Seiler, Patterson? and Downs!) of those! with highly conservative theoretical assumptions orgaghi, Kar, “Theoretial Soil Mechanis,” John Wiley Sots, New York 10th. 28 bi, pp. 26. "Tbi, pp. 856. ‘Seller, J, R, “Btfect of Depth of Embedmant on Pole Stability,” Wood Preserving News, Vol. 10, No. 11, No- venber {a08 \"Paiterson, Donald, “tiow to Design Pole Type Buildings” American’ Wood Breservers Inatfeate, 1957. 13.0 “Rovng, Dallas 1, et aly “Transmission Tower Founda: ions,” Journal of the Power Division, Proccedings Rony daumal of the Polver Division, Proceedings ASCE THEORETICAL DEVELOPMENT (Anderson, Will! Willianis” and Ivey"). The forces Fu and Vig were considered by Sulzberger.ti A char- acteristic of all of these theoretical treatments is that the contributions to Fa and Fay of the shear stresses in the x direction along’ the sides of the footing have been neglected. Another factor which has not been previously considered is the development of shear stresses (Vax and Van} in the 2 direction due to the vertical movement of footing surface areas with respect to the surrounding soil. ‘The neglect of these forces has contributed to, the conservatism of previous theoretical. solutions. These factors will be considered in this analysis, which will be broken down according to the following outlin. I. Soil with Both Cohesion and Internal Friction, A. Lateral Forces Fs, and Fy, L. Distribution of compressive around footing, perimeter stresses 2 Distribution of shear stresses around footing perimeter 3, Summation of components of stresses in x direction into Fy, and Fay “Anderson, W. C., “Foundations to Resist Tilting Moments Imposed “on “Upright Candilevers Supporting Highway Signs,” Highway Research Board, Bulletin 247, 1060. "Will, Heinrick, “Zur Berechnung der Binspannung und des Spannungsverlautes bel in das endreich elngegrabenen Piahlen,” Beton U. Eisen, 202% ee ‘Williams, Clement C., “The Design of Masonry Strue- PP MeGraw-Hill "Book Company, Ine, New York, 180, p. 479, Mivey, Don Le, and Hawking, Leon, “Signboard Footings to Resist Wind Loads,” Civil Engineering, December 1860, Pe “Sulzberger, G., “Die, Fundamente der Frellerlungs. ‘werk und ihre’ Berechnung.” Bulletins Association S\ dea Blectricions, dunt 1027. Seetion aA Figure 1. Drilled shaft footing subjected to an over- turning load.———_p Controid of Structure 9 c= Footing Deformations Figure 2. Soit deformations and footing forces developed by overturning loud. 4. Contribution of Fay and Fy to moment about the Point 2 = 0 Vertical Shear Forces Vay and Vay 1. Vertical movement (in the 2 direction) of points on the surface of the footing 2 Shear stress development on eylindrical surfaces 3. Summation of shear stresses into forces Vex and Vay 4, Summation of shear stresses into a moment resisting overturning (M,) Forces on Bottom of Footing Vay and Fa 1. Determination of Fay 2. Determination of Vis Development of equilibrium equations that can be solved to determine a footing’s maxi ‘mum resistance to overturning II, Cohesionless Soil, (Same development sequence as I.) Axis of Rotation h, ad Footing Forces Procedure and Solution Soil tested in such a way that there is cotesion but no apparent internal friction ean be considered a special case of Patt T with the angle of internal friction (6) equal to zero. Cohesionless soil necessitates a separate tuealment since active pressures on retreating. surfaces of the fooling are present, In each case it will be assumed that the footing is surrounded by a homogeneous isotropic soil with known values of cohesion (c) and angle of internal friction (4). The inherent nature of stratification makes it undesirable to formulate general equations which would encompass all the possibilities that eould be encountered in practice. ‘These problems must be treated on an indi vidual basis using the same basie principles develop for uniform soils, 1, Soil with Both Cohesion and Internal Friction A. Lateral Forces Fyy and Fy, 1. Distribution of compressive around footing, perimeter.Top View (a) Before Movement Figure 3, A segment of the footing at a depth z, cut out by two parallel planes which are perpendicular to the longi- tudinal axis of the cylinder, and a distance dz apart moves horizontally (in the x direction) in proportion to its distance from the axis of rotation (Figure 2). Viewing the segment from above, the stress conditions before and after movement are shown in Figure 3. For this development cylindrical coordinates will be sed, with positive values of 6 measured clockwise from the old x axis of rcs (the direction of movement) when viewed and r defining points radially from the z axis of the footin before, the longi tudinal footing axis is the 2 axis. The coordinate axis z is positive downward, with its origin at the top of the footing, Before movement of the footing, the stresees resent are those of the horizontal earth pressure at rest ese stresses are defined by Terzaghi'® as Kqyz, where is the coefficient of earth pressure al rest and is, the unit weight of the soil. As horizontal movement of of Segment etgh of Figure 2 See Insert | ‘Movement (x Direction) (b) After Movement Pz -| 7 A * vate (c) Insert |, Stresses Acting on Cube at Surface of Footing Soil stresses due to footing movement. this segment takes place, the stress increase on the advancing, surface and’ are reduced on the receding furface. "A'maximum value of stiess ig encountered on the portion of the advancing surface at the point © ‘This maximum strem decreases in some manner {0 a value of the original presse, Kyat = 9/2 and Sn? It will be assumed that this maximum radial stress can be expressed as a function of depth, unit weight and cohesion in a Rankine" type equation, Ky + Kee a K, and K, are functions of the angle of internal friction "Teraaghi, Karl, “Theoretical Soil Mechanics,” John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1963, p. 29. id Peck, Ralph B., “Soil Mechanics in ice)" John Wiley & Sons, New York,(g), but not necessarily the same functions derived by Rankine for frictionless walls of semi-infinite length. ‘The pressure on the receding surface (m/2 < © < 87/2) is rapidly reduced to zero as the footing loses contact with the soil. For values of cohesion (over 500 psf), at the depths under consideration for this type of footing (under 10 ft.) positive active pressure does not exist A cosine distribution of pressure slong the advanc- ing perimeter will be used to decrease the pressure from its maximum value of Kiyz + Kye to its minimum value of Kyyz Thus, or = Keyz + [ (Ki — Ky) 72 + Kae ] cos © (2) Some precedent has been established for this type of distribution in the solution of elasticity problems.'= Since the plastic flow concept allows development of additional stresses in areas adjacent to the initial point of maximum stress, this cosine distribution is probably conservative assumption. 2. Distribution of shear stresses around footing perimeter. Considering the shearing stresses developed by the ‘movement of the footing, it is apparent the greatest ten- dency for the development of shear in the O direction is at © = 17/2 and 37/2. Also apparent is the lack of ‘any shear development at © = 0." If the tendency for shear movement of the footing with respect to the soil is taken as the indicator of the development of shear stress, it is seen that a sine function of © could be used to describe this distribution. Since the maximum shear strese™® the soil can develop on this plane is otand + 6, the distbution between © = 0 and 0 = 2/2 will be (ortand + 0) sin © 6) 3. Summation of components of stresses in the x direction into Fy, and Fy, ‘The components of the stresses oy and tye inthe x direction can be integrated over the advancing perimoter of the footing segment, yielding the total resistance to movement in the x direction at any depth 2. "a/2 a, cosodA + 2 ° where o and rs are defined by equations (2) and (3) Fe and dA = F do de Integration yields Fug = 21 de(E) + 06), (4) "Peraaghi, Karl, “Theoretical Soil Mechanica,” John Wiley ‘and Sons, New York, 1858, pp. 87. “Timoshenko, S) and Goodier, J. Ny “Theory of Elastici- ty," MeGrate-Hill Book Company, Ine, 1951, p. 113. “Teraaghi, Karl, “Thooretical Soil Mechanics,” John Wiley ‘and Sons, New York, 1958, p. 7. where E=K, (1+ Z tnp— me — +) +k (E+ we and c= FP +e (ZF + Mt) ‘Then Fy, and Fy are determined by D Pas fra Substitution and integration yields and a= [Fo Jo (D Py = 2] yE + 0G (D—a) © 4, Contribution of Fyy and Fy to the moment about the point, 2 ="0, ‘The moments due to Fy and Fy, are defined by Fai = | 2Fy and Fy,z: 0 and Fan B. Vertical Shear Forces Vaq and Vx L. Vertical movement (in the 2 direction) of points on the surface of the footing. As shown in Figure 4, if the origin of coordinates, 2, x and © js shifted down to the axis of rotation, the ‘movement in the z direction of a point “i” due to a rota- tion about a — a’ of a can be expressed as ae — Feos a + r cos 0 From this equation it is seen that all points on the surface above the axis of rotation from 0 = 7/2 to © =~ 7/2 move downward, with the exception of the points z= 0,0 = 2/2 and 2 = 0,0 = 3n/2. Simi.‘nts on the surface below the axis of rotation Jarly, poi /2 and 0 = 3n/2 move petween the value of © upward. 2. Shear stress development on cylindrical surfaces, Due to this movement of the footing with respect fo the soll, the shear stresses shown in Figure 5 are pete Asin the cate of radial stresses the lost of Contact between the footing and the soil dictates that the Shear stresses are zero on the areas indicated. As indi ated before, the meximum value these stresses can achieve is or tand + ©, put they cannot fully approach this condition on surfaces OF the footing that already have « significant circum. ferential shear stress (ree). In consideration of this a eduction factor (Ji) is used to estimate the effect of this shearing stress. Thus, ta = I (or tang ) For very stiff cohesive materials, which allow only a small rotation Before reaching ultimate load, will obably approsch zero. For a highly plastic’ material Will fale some value between zero and 0 3. Summation of shear stresses into forces Vou and Vex ‘The force Vax shown in Figure 2 can be found by integrating the stresses on the surface above the axis of rotation, a (0/2 2 ta aA o Jo Sinnilarly, D pr/2 Ver] ta dA a Jo ‘The difference in Vzq and Vay which will be of interest v. Va — Veo Substitution and integration yield Bt [oe (Eke + = Ky) a0) @ (Rotation) 2+ cose Figure 4. Vertical movements of points on surface of footing.axis After Rotation ~ Qriginal Axis I~ Footing Rotation Rotation x Direction 5. Vertical shear stresses. Figure 5. 4, Summation of shear stresses into a ‘moment resisting overturning. (Mv) ‘The summation of all rz dA’s times their individual ‘moment arms (7) about the axis of rotation can be found by integration, yielding a moment resisting over- turning (M,). Thus, r { [wow an, i SURFACE which reduces to mJ, (YU + eW) ap tangD? u= (Ka-7 + hr) wap (Exum +1) C. Forces on Bottom of Footing, Vay and Fas AL. Determination of Fyy Fay is determined by a summation of forces verti- cally Fa = Fy > Fy = Fe + Vis — Vax a2) where F, is the total weight of the structure on the foot- ing plus the weight of the footing. Va — Vu was previously defined in Section 1, B3. as Fy If_any significant tilt (c) of the footing occurs, approximately half of the base of the footing will push into the soil while the other half will tilt upward, losing contact with the ground. This is shown by Figure 6. The exact distribution of pressure over this half of the circular bottom is of academic interest, probably ap- proaching a maximum value close to the outer edge about point “P,”, and a minimum value close to line © — ein the bottom view. 2 Determination of Vou. Having solved for the vertical force Fa, the shear force om the base of the footing will be due to the frietion and the cohesion on the contact area ‘The maximum value this force can achieve is then Futang +o Since the maximum stress takes place at @ rotation considerably less than that associated with ultimate load, the stress at ultimate load may be considerably less than maximum depending to a large degree on whether or not the soil is at eritical density. Therefore, the modifying factor of Jz is used. Figure 6. Contact area on base of footing due to rotation.Vu =e (Fatmp +e") aay D. Development of Equilibrium Equations. Two equations are available to solve for the two unknowns in the previous developments; a, the distance Jeter to the axis of rotation, and P,, the maximum load. These are the summation of forces in the horizontal Grection, and the summation of moments in the plane ‘of rotation, respectively Referring back to Figure 2, She = 0 Fa = Pa + Fat Vu aay and Meo = 0 Pal + Fan = My + Pats + VD (is) ‘The contributions of Fy and F, to the moment equation dependent on the rotation (a). As the applied load increases toward ite maximum value (Py) the lines of action of Fy and F, approach coincidence. This is true in the range of d/D ratios of practical interest. ‘There: fore, they can be neglected in the interest of making Pa, independent of a. Substitution of the previously defined terms into the equilibrium equations result in equations which can be solved for the distance down to the rotation point (8) and the maximum load (Py) Il, Cohesionless Soil ‘The basic difference in the development of a theory for cohesionless soils is that there is active pressure (Ky 72) on the portion of the footing retreating from the soil mass as well as the passive pressure on the advancing portion of the footing. The existence of these radial Active pressures necessitates the consideration of the shearing stresses, ry» and +. on these reireating surfaces a well as on the advancing surfaces. Figure 7 shows the resultant forces that must be evaluated to solve the problem, AS Lateral Forces Fy and Fo 1. Distribution of compressive stresses around footing perimeter, igure 8 lates the drbton of ral ress on a segment of the Tooting at depth moving through the soils Using the ssme procedure as the cohesive de- Yelopment, the tadal stress on the surface of the footing San he delined as follows from 0 =0 wo=x oO, = Koy + (Ky— Kye (1) and from o = % Or = Kye — (Ky — Ka)yzeos0 (2) ‘The second subscript f or r denotes front and rear of the footing if the front is considered the advancin portion and rear the retreating portion. ‘Thus the f side and = =~— *h#-—— Centroid of Structure ic Soil Surtoce Figure 7, Footing forces developed by overturning load, cohesionless soil. * side switch as the portion below the axis of rotation is de onside 2. Distribution of shear stresses around footing perimeter. rea was defi ment. ‘Thus, -d previously in the cohesive develop: tan ¢ sino (3) and o;, tang sino. a“) 3, Summation of components of stresses in x direction into Fxa and Fxb. ‘The resistance to movement in the x ditection of @ ‘segment of thickness dz at depth 2 is given by the sum- mation of forces due to a and rs, ‘These summations are: A 2 [7 o,cosean Jo (7 Jo Fas, -2 ©, c08 0 dA 6)Top View of Segment efgh of Figure 7 or (0) Before Movement (>) After Movement Figure 8 Cohesionless soil stresses due to footing movement. a/2 Pag 2 fy noan 0 a/2 +2 ra, sin dA 6 if. : 6) ‘The radial stress (7-,) on the retreating portion of the footing is contributing to movement, while the shear stress it produces (rze.) is resisting movement, ‘The resulting force is then defined by equation 7. Fa = Foo, + Fang ) Substitution and integration yields Fa = Lede ey tere " [: (« (4-2) + bueno ) | Now Fay is the summation of these forces over the por- tion of the footing down to the axis of rotation (from z= 0, to z = D) and Fyy is the summation below the rotation point (from 2 ="a to z = D) (K,—Ka) + 2 tang oy (20°) n of the Fxa and Fxb to ‘moment about the point 2 = 0. ‘The contribution of these forces to the moment sbout z= 0's Fu a and Fam , where Fan = ar) and D . Favs 2F a Ma) | az) B. Vertical Shear Forces Vaa,. Vaz» Vee, and Va, 1. Same as I BL 2 Same as I B2 3. Summation of shear stresses into forces.‘The four vertical shear forces shown in Figure 7 will be treated. Using the same arguments as in the cohesive development, let ta = hoe tang a3) Then a fa/2 2 trap dA SiSt D a2 Vo, = f f ra, dA ajo a (a/2 2 ra, 4A ojo Dae Vou = rag AA ajo ‘The total vertical force (Fy) is equal to Vag + Ven, — Vung — Vang ¥. and Substitution and integration yields Fy = Jar tam y(Ky— Ky) 4. Summation of vertical shear stresses into a moment resisting overturning (My). ‘The contribution of each segment of the footing (ie, above or below the axis of rotation and on the front or rear) will he determined by: fa (a2 Meee | / Ti tem, dA, oso Mun, = 2 / DP a ak es, ofo ™™ M, 2 fe [ea vn at ojo D pars sya? f (772% vay 3A ojo The total moment My is then defined by My = Ma, + Ma, + Ma, + Many Substitution and integration yields KC 5) 7 Ke as) + Fut «| C. Forces on Bottom of Footing, Vax and Fax M, = ED*y Itang 1. Determination of Foe Voy and Fay are shown in Figure 7. Fay is deter mined by the summation of forces vertically. Fa =F- Fy Where Fy is the total weight of the structure on the footing. Fy is the unbalance in the vertical shear stresses defined by" Equation 14 ‘The maximum value Vay can then assume is do- fined by Vu = Fa tand Since the base of the footing has already reached ‘and passed this maximum, value before the maximum footing resistance is reached (the ultimate lateral forces Fy and Fy develop more slowly) this value of Vsy should be modified by the factor J. ‘Thus Vou 2 Fa tang ae) D. Development of Equilibrium Equations. ‘The summation of forces in the horizontal (x) direction (Equation 17’) and the summation of moments in the plane of the footing rotation (Equation 18) are the conditions necessary to solve for a, the distance down, to the point of rotation, and Py, the ultimate load. Da = 0, Fa = Pa + Vea + Fae a7) PM "Sulgberger, G., “Die Fundamente der Freileitunostrag- Worke und ihre Berechnung.” Bulletin, Association Suisse Des lectrieiens, June 1827. = 0, M,+Fyas+VeuD = Put Fats (18°)SUMMARY ‘The application ofthe theory developed inthis paper to engineering. problena wil depend.on. the. accurate txniution of the various soil coefficients by footing tests ‘This evaluation in 4 common characerstic of alt all Applied theory in soll mechanic. ‘The coefficients of active and passive earth pressure (K,, Ka, Ky and Ky) have been previously defined by Rankine’ for the ease of frictionless walls of semi-infinite length. ‘They are given as the following functions of the angle of internal friction (6). kus (6-4) Since the problem under consideration is not the ss Terzaghi's because of footing frietion and the ly narrow footing width, it would not be expected “Peraghi, Karl, “Theoretical Soil Mechanics,” John Wiley and Sons, New York, pp. 80 and $8. that the same coefficients would be applicable. One possible alton would be Yor one or more af them {0 be mouified by'am empirically detemined malin, tion Tactor, ‘This factor may prove to be-a function of the particular soil characterises Other coefficients such as J:, Jz and K,, which have 4 possible variation of 0 to 1.0 may prove to have a relatively small effect on the solution for ultimate load. By checking the sensitivity of the solution to variations in these coefficients, and by comparison with actual foot- ing test data, values may be chosen which will need little modification’ over wide variations in soil properties. In considering the solution of the equilibrium equa- tions which are derived, (Equations 14 and 15 for co- hesive soil and 17° and 18° for cohesionless soil) the elimination of ono of the unknowns (a or Pz) will result jin a cubic equation in the other unknown. Since the equation is quite cumbersome, the problem has heen programmed for the IBM. 7094, This program is now boeing used to check the sensitivity of the solution to the various soil parameters. Thisty model tests have been run on soils varying from cohestonless sands to highly plastic clays as another part of this study."The theory will be compared to these tests in Research Report 105-2‘echnical Reports Center ‘Texas Transportation Institute RESISTANCE OF A DRILLED SHAFT FOOTING TO OVERTURNING LOADS, MODEL TESTS AND CORRELATION WITH THEORY By Don L. Ivey, Kenneth J. Koch and Carl F. Raba, Jr. Research Report Number 105-2 Design of Footings for Minor Service Structures Research Study Number 2-5-67-105 Sponsored by The Texas Highway Department in cooperation with the Department of ‘Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Bureau of Public Roads July, 1968 TEXAS TRANSPORTATION INSTITUTE ‘Texas A&M University College Station, Texas.ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This research was conducted under an interagency contract between the Texas ‘Transportation, Inalitate and the Texas Highway Department. Tt was sponsored jointly by the Texas Highway Department and the Bureaa of Public Roads. ‘Liason was maintained through Mr. D. Le Hawkins and Mo. H. D. Butler, contact repro Sontatives for the Texas Highway Department, and through Mr, Robert J. Prochaska of the Bureau of Public Roads ‘The theory presented in Research Report 105-1 was programmed for the IBM 7004 for analysis of the footings in this study by Mr. Leon k= Travis, III, and Mr. Kurt A. Schembor. ‘Tho opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed in thie publication are those of the authors and not necessrily those of the Bureau of Pubhe Roads,SYNOPSIS Reported in this paper aro the results of twenty-eight model tests of drilled shaft footings subjected to overturning horizontal loads. ‘The models are geometrically similar but roduced by a factor of six camapared to the average sizo of footings used for minor service strictures in Texas, The soils investigated range from cobesion- Tess sands, through soils with both eohesion and an angle of shear resistance, to clays vith no augle of shear resistance when tested using the unconsolidated-undrained Quick triaxial compression test. ‘The results of the model footing tests are compared with the theory developed in this study!" It was found that the conveational methods of predicting ultimato load were conservative by as much as 500% for the cohesionless sands and by as Iitde as 20% for the clays. The coefficients developed in the now theoretical treat rent ro evaluated s0 that the ultimate loads on this type of footing in any given soil can be predicted. “Refers to numbers in eelected references.TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION. — EQUIPMENT AND INSTRUMENTATION. General Loading System Load Measurement Rotation Measurement PLACEMENT OF FOOTINGS AND SOIL CONDITIONS. Easterwood Clay Trinity Clay Laboratory Sandy Clay Ottawa Sand TESTING PROCEDURE.NOTATION © = cohesion (forve/length*).* angle of shear resistance (degrees). ‘y= unit weight, in place or wet (foree/length*) 1 = modified unit weight of soil in the direction of the applied load (foree/ Sn ee ee ee ‘yo = modified unit weight of soil in the direction opposite the applied loed (foree/ length). P= horizontal load applied to footing at some distance H above ground (force). H_ = height of horizontal load, P, above ground (length). D a depth of footing (length). footing diameter (length) 8 = depth to point of footing rotation (length). Ky = coefficient of earth pressure at rest (dimensionless) K, = coefficient of passive earth pressure applied to unit weight term (dimension- less). K, = coefficient of passive earth pressure applied to cohesion term (dimensionless). coefficient of active earth pressure (dimensionless). k= unit weight coefficient (dimensionless). Jn = coefficient of shear stress, vertical footing, surfaces. (dimensionless) Js = coefficient of shear stress, footing bottom (dimensionless). B= earth pressure coefficient modifier (dimensionless) "The dimensions of the vatious symbols are given in parentheses after each definitionIntroduction The wide use of drilled shaft footings to support service structures necessary for the functioning of ijghway system has focused attention on the highly conservative design ‘procedures, preveally in use. The foundations of structures. such as. signbosrds,” strain oles, and lighting poles should be designed using fac fore of safety consistent withthe relative importance of the particular structure As the next necessary step, after the development of a theoretical treatment for this type of foundation, 8 series of model teste was undertaben, Tho puspoes Of theo teste wae to evaluate certain coefficients intror duced inthe theoretical treatment and to establish the degree of precision to be expected in predicting ultimate loads with the new theoretical treatment. The footings = from ? to 4 in, and in depth Height of load application ranged tested ranged in dian from 10 to 12 in, from 0 to 42 in, The soils in which footings were tested ranged from a dry sand with no cohesion to a clay with no anglo of shear resistance. The soils axe referred to in this way on the basis of the unconsolidated-undrained ‘quick triaxial compression test. This type of teat was tused to determino the pertinent soil parameters because it best simulated conditions of short term loading in the fiold. It is recognized that the same soils tested. in_an- other way would exhibit different properties. Eight tests of footings in soils with both cohesion and an angle of shear resistance aro reported. This is the second of a series of papers to be writ ten concerned with the design of these footings. ‘The first, Research Report 105-1, reported in detail the theoretical development of the load prediction equations which are compared with test data in this paper. Equipment and Instrumentation General In order to conduct theso tests, it was necessary to dovelop systems capable of (1) applying a horizontal force on the footing at a uniform displacement rato and (2) measuring the load acting on the footing’ at known angles of rotation, Loading System ‘A mechanically driven loading machine normally used for compression testing was modified to apply the ‘overturning force to the footin re 1 illastrates the loading system used for these tes ‘The loading machine was Fun at a apoed of 0.05 inch per minute hut the pulley systom increased this speed to 0.20 inch per rine at the footing Load Measurement ‘Tho load applied to the footing was measured by means of a foree transducer spliced into the cable ap- ately 2 feet from the footing. Because of the pro. co [riree] freon +r | Figure 1. Loading system. wide range of load developed, 3 transducers wero used for the various tests. ‘The capacities of each transducer were 0 to 50 pounds, 0 to 400 pounds, and 0 to 1000 pounds, respectively. The transducers were constructed of a metal bar instrumented with a full bridge of foil strain gages Figure 2. Point source of lightFigure 3. Placement of ultraviolet lamps. ‘The output voltages from these strain gages were ampli- fied and recorded on a visleorder, providing a continu. ons record of the load on the footing Rotation Measurement ‘The position of the footing at known loads was ‘measured by recording the rotation of a metal pipe that ‘was attached to the top of each footing. The pipe was serewod onto a %-inch diameter threaded rod extending. from the top of the concrete footings. The cable from the loading machine was connected to the pipe hy means fof a clamp that permitted the height of pull to be varied along the entire length of the pole. ‘Very small holes were drilled in the pipe on 5-inch centers along a straight line on the upper three feet of the pipe. ‘These holes provided point sources of light from two ulravilet lamps mounted on a carriage that hhad been lowered into tho pipe as shown in Figures 2 and 3. As the footing was rotated, these light sources deloped lines of movement on light sensitive paper t ‘mounted on & wooden panel adjacent to the pipe. lights were turned on and off at specific loads so. th the position of all ten traces could be related. A st Tine was extrapolated through each series of termination points to find the position of the footing at that specific Toad. Because of the use of the light sensitive paper, it ‘was necessary to perform all tho tests in the dark, When the light sources were turned off, an external triggering device simultaneously marked the visicorder load record to denote the load at which the rotations were measured. Placement of Footings and Soil Conditions Easterwood Clay ‘A series of tests was conducted in the shallow sandy clay located in the vicinity of Easterwood Airport, Col loge Station, ‘Texas. This soil was chosen as a repre sentative of soils possessing both cohesion (ec) and. an fangle of shear resistance (}), as determined by the Tunconsolidated-undeained.quick’triaxial test. After the test site location vas determined by means of a series Of augor borings, the area was levelod and prepared for the installation of footings A detailed procedure was established in order to install the footings as they” would be placed in actual practice Special hand angers wore designed and. con- Hructed to drill the footing hole These augers ere aligned and guided. during the drilled operation by. a Wooden template placel on top of the ground. The Cxeavated hole was aright crear oyinder. A heavily Feinforeed steal cage was lowered into each hole which Ws subsequently filled with a cement mortar made from Type Ill cont snd 20°30 Ottawa sand. The steel cage wear vibrated with a portable vibrator to oliminate ie Bubbles or voids on the footing surface. After the footing teste were completed, & total of nine borings were made with continuous sampling to @ depth of 18 in, Undisturbed soil samplos wore obtained in the test area by a truck-mounted rotary drill rig, The specimens (2.8 in, in diameter) were sampled with thin- walled Shelby tubes. After extrusion the samples were: wrapped in aluminum foil and placed in cartons for Lransportation back to the University’s soil laboratory. Upon reaching the laboratory, the specimens were sealed with @ microvan wax and stored in a humid room for classification and strength tests Comprehensive classification and strength tests were conducted on the soil samples. The classification tests jneluded hydrometer analysis and determination of the Atterberg Indices; the procedures outlined by Lambe? wore followed in theso tests. The soil vas classified as CH material by the Unified Soil Classification System, AA series of unconfined compression and quick triaxial tests? was performed to establish the soil strength param- eters (cohesion and angle of shear resistance) under simulated field conditions. Those tests wore performed fon representative samples from zero to 6 in., 6 in. to 12 in, and 12 in, to 18 in, depths. Mohr-Coulomb failure envelopes were constructed from unconfined compression and quick triaxial com- pression test results on selected specimens. ‘The average values determined for cohesion and anglo of shear re- sistance from these tests were 2810 psf and 9" respec: lively. The average in place density was 133 pef. Trinity Clay A series of teats was conducted in the laboratory using a soil exhibiting mo. angle of shear resistance in the quick triaxial tests, ‘The clay was obtained in dry