GEO-SLOPE International Ltd, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

www.geo-slope.com

Hyperbolic Soil Bearing Capacity

1

Introduction

This example involves analyzing the bearing capacity of a round footing. The example is useful for
illustrating several SIGMA/W features and procedures, and for demonstrating that SIGMA/W has been
formulated correctly.
The soil is treated as having a nonlinear hyperbolic stress-strain behavior. With this model, the soil
stiffness in essence softens as the shear stresses increase; that is, the soil stiffness modulus E diminishes
as the shear stress increases. The soil softens until it reaches its shear strength, at which point the
deformations become very large and the footing load has reached the maximum available; it has reached
the bearing capacity.
The hyperbolic model consequently makes it possible to compute a nonlinear load-deformation curve for
the footing and to estimate the ultimate bearing capacity.
Closed-form bearing capacity formulas are available for a simple configuration like this, making it
possible to compare the SIGMA/W results with hand-calculated values.

Feature highlights

The soil stiffness modulus E is a function of the stress state in the ground, and therefore we must first
establish the insitu stress state conditions before we can apply the footing load. This requires a special
insitu-type analysis.
The undrained shear strength Cu and the modulus E can be specified as a function of the overburden
(initial vertical stress). These features are illustrated here.

Hyperbolic constitutive model

It is useful to have the hyperbolic soil model in mind when analyzing and discussing his problem.

R f ( 1 3 )(1 sin )
2
Et = 1
E i and Et = 1 R f (1.0 ) E i when at the shear strength
2c ( cos ) + 2 3 sin

Problem configuration

The next diagram shows the problem configuration. Note the English system of units. The footing has a
radius of 4 ft. This is an axisymmetric problem, so the symmetric axis needs to be at an x-coordinate of
zero.
The footing load is applied at a constant displacement rate of -0.01 ft per load step.
The horizontal displacement under the footing area is fixed at zero.
Pushing the footing into the ground at an even level rate and fixing the horizontal displacement is like
simulating a rigid footing with a very rough base such that there is no slippage at the footing-soil contact.

SIGMA/W Example File: Hyperbolic footing.doc (pdf)(gsz)

Page 1 of 7

GEO-SLOPE International Ltd, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

Radius = 4 ft

www.geo-slope.com

Round footing

40

Axisymmetric
axis
35

30

Elevation - feet

25

20

15

10

-5
-5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Distance - feet

Analysis 1 Initial insitu stresses

This analysis establishes the initial insitu stresses. This best accomplished with the SIGMA/W analysis
type called Insitu.
The Insitu analysis type uses the specified soil unit weight and the Poissons ratio. The modulus
parameter E is ignored. The unit weight for this problem is specified as 100 pcf and is 0.495.
Remember that in a 2D laterally constrained problem, Ko is related to as follows:
Ko = / (1 ) = 0.495 / (1 0.495) = 0.98
The insitu analysis results should indicate that the horizontal (x) stresses are 0.98 times the vertical stress.
The vertical stresses will be times the depth below the ground surface.
The next diagram shows the configuration for the insitu analysis. The cross-hatching indicates that the
gravity load is being applied. Note the boundary conditions on the left and right, which allow vertical
movement but not horizontal movement. This is equivalent to having rollers on the vertical sides.
SIGMA/W Example File: Hyperbolic footing.doc (pdf)(gsz)

Page 2 of 7

GEO-SLOPE International Ltd, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

www.geo-slope.com

Need diagram here; painting is not right with gravity turned on.
Figure 1 shows the initial insitu vertical and horizontal stress profiles. They are of course very similar,
because Ko is close to 1.0.
There are slight bends in the profiles at both ends. This is due to the fact that the stresses are constant
within these 4-node rectangular elements. Averaging the stresses from adjacent elements at the nodes
results in a nice straight line except for the nodes along the perimeter, which reflect the constant stresses
in the elements.
40

Y (ft)

30

20

10

0
0

1000

2000

3000

4000

(psf)

Figure 1

Analysis 2-Constant C and E

In this analysis the undrained strength Cu and the E-modulus are specified as constants.
Depending on the bearing capacity factor used, the ultimate bearing capacity for an undrained soil with a
round footing at the surface is:

Qult = 1.3 c N c
The value of Nc is typically taken as 5.14.
With Cu at 1000 psf and Nc = 5.14, the bearing capacity is 6670 psf. The load deformation curve in Figure
2 shows that applied load when the settlement has reached one-foot is right around this value.
(The load-deformation curve in Figure 2 was created by using the Graph Sum vs. Average Values option.
All the Y-Boundary forces at each of the nodes under the footing are tallied and the Y-displacement is
averaged for all the nodes. Without this option, a load-deformation curve is produced for each node).

SIGMA/W Example File: Hyperbolic footing.doc (pdf)(gsz)

Page 3 of 7

GEO-SLOPE International Ltd, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

www.geo-slope.com

Load-Deformation
0

Y-Boundary Force (lbs)

-10000
-20000
-30000
-40000
-50000
-60000
-70000
-1.0

-0.8

-0.6

-0.4

-0.2

0.0

Y-Displacement (ft)

Figure 2

The load deformation curve does not flatten out at some well-defined value. This is in large part due to
the fact that the tangent modulus Et can never go to zero in the hyperbolic stress-strain relationship.
Radius = 4 ft

Round footing

40

etric

35

30

30

00
0

10000

15

00

20

90

Elevation - feet

70
0

25

00

0
00
50

10

Figure 3 Tangent E-modulus contours at the end of loading

SIGMA/W Example File: Hyperbolic footing.doc (pdf)(gsz)

Page 4 of 7

GEO-SLOPE International Ltd, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

www.geo-slope.com

The parameter Rf is specified as 0.7. This means that the Et value will be 9000 psf when the applied shear
stresses reach the soil shear strength. Figure 3 shows the variation in Et at the end of the loading. Right
under the footing where the shear stresses are the highest, Et diminishes to about 10,000 as it properly
should.
Worth noting is the fact that Cu and Ei are constant in this analysis and therefore not dependent on the
initial insitu stresses, but Et may be affected by any initial shear in the ground. In this problem there is
essentially no initial shear, since the vertical and horizontal insitu stresses are nearly the same. In
situations where this is not the case, the initial insitu shear stresses may affect the initial Et value.

Analysis 3 Variable C and E

In this case we want to make Cu and Ei a function of the initial overburden stress (function of depth), but
then keep these values constant while the footing load is applied. The two specified functions are shown
in Figure 4 and Figure 5. Cu varies linearly with depth while Ei varies with some curved relationship. In
the previous analysis Ei was a constant 100,000 psf. Now Ei varies about this value. The minimum value
is 55,000 and goes up to about 137,000 psf at depth.
The primary purpose of this analysis is to illustrate the capability of specifying material properties that
vary with depth as a function of the initial insitu stress state, but then remain constant while the loading is
applied and the soil behaves in an undrained manner.

C(u) with depth

Total Cohesion (psf)

3000

2000

1000

1000

2000

3000

Y-Total Stress (psf)

Figure 4 Specified Cu function

SIGMA/W Example File: Hyperbolic footing.doc (pdf)(gsz)

Page 5 of 7

GEO-SLOPE International Ltd, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

www.geo-slope.com

E(i) function
140000
Total E-Modulus (psf)

130000
120000
110000
100000
90000
80000
70000
60000
50000

1000 2000 3000 4000 5000

Y-Total Stress (psf)

Figure 5

Figure 6 shows the SIGMA/W computed variation of Cu with depth. The data is plotted for the initial and
last Load Step numbers (0 and 100 sec where the sec unit is really load-step number). As they should, the
curves fall on top of each other; that is, the strength is the same at the end as at the beginning under the
simulated undrained condition.
Cu with depth
40

30

Y (ft)

0 sec

20

100 sec

10

0
1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

Undrained Shear Strength (psf)

Note that Cu is remains a constant at depth. This is because the insitu vertical stresses fall outside the
specified function. Generally, any values outside the function take on the value of the data at the ends of
the function. This is graphically illustrated by the straight line segments at the ends of the Ei function in
Figure 7.

SIGMA/W Example File: Hyperbolic footing.doc (pdf)(gsz)

Page 6 of 7

GEO-SLOPE International Ltd, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

www.geo-slope.com

E(i) with depth

40

30

Y (ft)

0 sec

20

100 sec
10

0
Tangential Modulus (E) (psf)

Figure 6 Need to re-do; wrong graph

The contours of Et now look vastly different because Ei was specified as being a function of depth.
Radius = 4 ft

Round footing

40

Axisymmetric
axis
10

35

00

60000
00
700

30

Elevation - feet

25

0
9000

20

15

05
1.1e+0

10

-5
-5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Distance - feet

Figure 7

Summary

This example illustrates how material properties can be specified as a function of depth, how the
properties can remain constant during loading, and confirms that the hyperbolic model is functioning as
expected.
SIGMA/W Example File: Hyperbolic footing.doc (pdf)(gsz)

Page 7 of 7