Chapter 8 Bearing Capacity Part 1 []

8.1 Introduction
A foundation is that part of a structure which transmits loads directly to the underlying soil. The
ultimate bearing capacity (qu) is defined as the pressure which would cause shear failure of the
supporting soil immediately below and adjacent to a foundation. [,
]
A foundation must satisfy two fundamental requirements: (1) the factor of safety against shear
failure of the supporting soil must be adequate, a value between 2 and 3 normally being specified; (2)
the settlement of the foundation should be tolerable and, in particular, differential settlement should not
cause any unacceptable damage of the structure. The allowable bearing capacity (qa) is defined as the
maximum pressure which may be applied to the soil such that the above two requirements are satisfied.
[: (1),2 3 ,(2)
,
]
8.2 Types of shear failure []
Three distinct modes of failure have been identified and these are illustrated in Fig. 8.1. In general
shear failure, continuous failure surfaces develop between the edges of the footing and the ground
surface. The state of plastic equilibrium is fully developed throughout the soil above the failure
surfaces. Heaving of the ground surface occurs (see Fig.8.1a). This mode of failure is typical for soils
of low compressibility (i.e. dense or stiff soils). The ultimate bearing capacity is well defined. [
:,, ]
In local shear failure, there is significant compression of the soil under the footing and only partial
development of the state of plastic equilibrium. The failure surfaces, therefore, do not reach the ground
surface and only slight heaving occurs (see Fig.8.1b). This type of failure is associated with soils of
high compressibility and is characterized by the occurrence of relatively large settlements. The ultimate
bearing capacity is not well defined. [:,
, ,]
In punching shear failure, there is relatively high compression of the soil under the footing
accompanied by shearing in the vertical direction around the edges of the footing. There is no heaving
of the ground surface (see Fig.8.1c). Relatively large settlements are also a characteristic of this mode
and the ultimate bearing capacity is not well defined. [:,
,,,
]
8.3 Ultimate Bearing Capacity of Shallow Foundations []
The ultimate bearing capacity (qu) is defined as the pressure which would cause shear failure of
the supporting soil immediately below and adjacent to a foundation. The allowable bearing capacity
(qa) is defined as
s
u
a
F
q
q
(8.1)
where Fs is the factor of safety and its value is between 2 and 3. Foundations can be classified as
shallow and deep foundations. In general, if the depth of a foundation (d) is smaller than or equal to its
breadth (b), the foundation is classified as shallow foundation. [
. , d b ]
8.3.1 Bearing capacity of foundations on weightless soils (Prandtls Method) []
The failure mechanism for a strip footing is shown in Fig. 8.2. The footing of width b and infinite
length carries a uniform pressure q on the surface of a mass of homogeneous, isotropic soil. The shear
strength parameters for the soil are c and but the unit weight is assumed to be zero. The foundation
is assumed to be smooth. In addition, a surcharge pressure qo acting on the soil surface is considered,
otherwise if c = 0 the bearing capacity of a weightless soil would be zero. [8.2
. b,,q,,,,
qo]
As the pressure becomes equal to the ultimate bearing capacity qc, the footing will have been
pushed downwards into the soil mass, producing a state of plastic equilibrium, in the form of (i) an
active Rankine zone ABC, (ii) zones of radial shear ACD and BCG. and (iii) passive Rankine zones
ADE and BGF. A state of plastic equilibrium exists above the surface EDCGF.[
,ABC ,ACDBCG,ADE BGF ]
The angles ABC and BAC are 45+ /2. The angles DAE, DEA, GBF and GFB
are 45- /2. The surfaces CD and CG are logarithmic spirals to which BC and ED, or AC and FG are
tangential.
Based on the mechanism described above, the following exact solution is obtained using plastic
theory for the ultimate bearing capacity of a strip footing on the surface of a weightless soil.[
, ]
1
]
1

,
_

+ +
1
]
1

,
_

+

2
45 tan e q cot 1
2
45 tan e c q
2 tan
o
2 tan
u
(8.2)
Equation (8.2) can be expressed in the following form:
q o c u
N q N c q +
(8.3)
where

,
_

+

2
45 tan e N
2 tan
q
(8.4)
( )
1
]
1

,
_

+

cot 1 N cot 1
2
45 tan e N
q
2 tan
c
(8.5)
Nq and Nc are bearing capacity factors. Foundations are not normally located on the surface of a soil
mass, as assumed in the above solutions, but at a depth d below the surface. In applying these solution
in practice, it is assumed that the shear strength of the soil between the surface and depth d is neglected,
this soil being considered only as a surcharge imposing a uniform pressure qo =
o
d on the horizontal
plane at foundation level, where d is depth of the foundation and
o
is unit weight of soil above the
base of the foundation. Equation (8.3) becomes [Nq Nc . (8.3)qo
, qo = d, d ]
q o c u
N d N c q +
(8.6)
8.3.2 Bearing capacity of foundations on soil having weight
1. Smooth Foundations []
The ultimate bearing capacity derived from equation (8.6) does not take into account the weight
of soil. No closed-form solutions have been obtained for the bearing capacity of foundations on soils
which have weight. To simplify the calculations, we assume that the principle of superposition can be
used in deriving the bearing capacity. As a result, the ultimate bearing capacity can be expressed in the
following form:
q o c u
N d N c N b
2
1
q + +

(8.7)
where Nq and Nc are values obtained for weightless soil (see equations (8.4) and (8.5)), and N is a
coefficient defining the bearing capacity of a soil having weight but no cohesion or surcharge (c = qo =
0). We must remember that superposition cannot be validly applied when considering the
behaviour of a plastic material. However the value of qu is under-estimated by this procedure. The
values of N are still not certainly known. One of the most widely used values for N was obtained by
Brinch Hansen (1986) and shown as follows: [,,8.7
,Nq Nc 8.4 and 8.5 ; 8.7 N ,
8.8 ]

2
c
tan N 8 . 1 N (8.8)
2. Rough Foundations(Terzaghis method) []
If the foundation is rough, so that no slip takes place on AB (see Fig. 8.2), the zone ABC moves
downwards as a rigid wedge with the foundation. Terzaghi (1943) assumed that the angles ABC and
BAC in Fig. 8.2 were equal to , i.e. ABC is not considered to be an active Rankine zone. Terzaghi
proposed the ultimate bearing capacity expressed in a form like equation (8.7) but the expressions for
the Nq and Nc are obtained by modifying the Prandtl-Reisners solution. Nq, Nc and N are functions of
and the their relationships are shown in Fig.8.3. [,AB ,
8.2 ABC BAC , ABC ,8.7 ,
Nq, Nc N8.3 ]
3. Correction factors for ultimate bearing capacity []
Equation (8.7) is derived based on a strip foundation and a general shear failure mechanism. If the
foundations are circular or square in shape, or are subjected to local shear failure, equation (8.7) has to
be modified accordingly. [8.7 ,
,8.7 ]
A. Local shear failure []
Equation (8.7) is modified to
*
q o
*
c
* *
u
N d N c N b
2
1
q + +

(8.9)
where Nq
*
, Nc
*
and N
*
are evaluated from
*
instead of
c
3
2
c
*
(8.10)

,
_

tan
3
2
tan
1 *
(8.11)
B. Shape of Foundation []
Equation (8.7) becomes, for a square footing
q o c u
N d N c 2 . 1 N b 4 . 0 q + +
(8.12)
for a circular footing
q o c u
N d N c 2 . 1 N R 6 . 0 q + +
(8.13)
where R is radius of the circular footing.
8.3.3 Vesics Method []
Based on the work of Prandtl, Vesic assumed the foundation is subjected to general shear failure
and the foundation is smooth. Vesic arrived the same expression (equation (8.7)) for the ultimate
bearing capacity as proposed by Terzaghi. The expressions for Nq and Nc are the same as equations
(8.4) and (8.5), but a new expression for N is proposed [Nq Nc 8.4 8.5
, 8.14 N]
+

tan ) 1 N ( 2 N
q (8.14)
Vesic also proposed a series of correction factors for the ultimate bearing capacity, equation (8.7)
is modified as follows: []
q q q q q q q o
c c c c c c c u
b g i d S N d
b g i d S N c b g i d S N b
2
1
q
+
+

(8.15)
where
q c
S , S , S
are shape factors for foundation, []
q c
d , d , d
are depth factors, []
q c
i , i , i
are inclination factors for surcharge, []
q c
g , g , g
are inclination factors for foundation, []
q c
, ,
are soil compressibility factors, []
q c
b , b , b
are inclination factors for ground surface. []
8.3.4 Ultimate bearing capacity for saturated soft clays (Skemptons Method) []
For saturated soft clays under undrained conditions (
u = 0), the failure surface is a circular arc
instead of the one shown in Fig. 8.2. Skempton (1951) proposed the following expression for the
ultimate bearing capacity of a footing:
d N c q
o c u u
+
(8.16)
where cu is undrained shear strength of the soil (the average value at depth 2/3 b below the bottom of
the foundation is used), d is depth of the foundation,
o is unit weight of soil above base of the
foundation and the factor Nc is a function of the shape of the footing and the depth/breadth ratio (d/b).
Skemptons values of Nc are given in Fig.8.4. [ ,
8.16 . 8.16 cu 2/3 b , d
,
o , Nc 8.4 ]
Fig.8.1 Types of failure: (a) general shear, (b) local shear, (c) punching shear
(a)
(b)
(c)
(a) (c) (b)
Pressure
Settlement
q
u
q
o
q
o
b
Fig.8.2 Failure mechanism under a strip loading

Fig.8.3 Terzaghis bearing capacity factors
Fig.8.4 Skemptons values of Nc for
u = 0
BEARING CAPACITY FACTORS [After Terzaghi and Peck (1948)]
60 50 40 30 20 10 0 20 40 60 80
N and N
0
10
20
30
40
(
d
e
g
r
e
e
s
)
q c
N

N
N
q
B
D
a
b
c
d
q= D
Q
f
f
f
Bearing capacity of a shallow foundation
ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY OF CLAY ( = 0 only) (After A.W. Skempton)
0 1 2 3 4 5
D/B
5
6
7
8
9
N
C
i
r
c
l
e
o
r
s
q
u
a
r
e
C
o
n
tin
uo
u
s
c
5.14
B
D
N (for rectangle)
= (0.84+0.16 ) N (square)
L= Length of footing
B
L
c
q = cN
c ult
q = B N + cN + D N continuous footing
1
2
f

c

f q
q = 0.4 BN + 1.3cN + D N square
f
c

f q
q = 0.6 RN + 1.3cN + D N circular
f
c

f q
q = cN + D
f c

c

N
c

BEARING CAPACITY THEORIES OF TERZAGHI AND SKEMPTON

BEARING CAPACITY FACTORS [After Terzaghi and Peck (1948)]
60 50 40 30 20 10 0 20 40 60 80
N and N
0
10
20
30
40
(
d
e
g
r
e
e
s
)
q c
N

N
N
q
B
D
a
b
c
d
q= D
Q
f
f
f
Bearing capacity of a shallow foundation
ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITY OF CLAY ( = 0 only) (After A.W. Skempton)
0 1 2 3 4 5
D/B
5
6
7
8
9
N
C
i
r
c
l
e
o
r
s
q
u
a
r
e
C
o
n
tin
uo
u
s
c
5.14
B
D
N (for rectangle)
= (0.84+0.16 ) N (square)
L= Length of footing
B
L
c
q = cN
c ult
q = B N + cN + D N continuous footing
1
2
f

c

f q
q = 0.4 BN + 1.3cN + D N square
f
c

f q
q = 0.6 RN + 1.3cN + D N circular
f
c

f q
q = cN + D
f c

c

N
c

BEARING CAPACITY THEORIES OF TERZAGHI AND SKEMPTON