bearing capacity theories
Post on 06-Jul-2018
244 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/17/2019 Bearing Capacity Theories
1/17
4/28/2016
1
010Foundation Engineering(3-1-0-4)
1
Course instructor
Dr. Trudeep N. DaveInstitute of Infrastructure Technology Research and Management
E-mail: trudeepdave@iitram.ac.in
Class timings:Monday: 11:00 to 12:00Tuesday: 10.00 to 11.00Thursday: 11.00 to 12.00
Bearing Capacity TheoryBearing Capacity
2
3
To perform satisfactorily, shallow foundations must have two maincharacteristics:
1. They have to be safe against overall shear failure in the soil that
supports them.
2. They cannot undergo excessive displacement, or settlement.(The term excessive is relative, because the degree of settlementallowed for a structure depends on several considerations.)
4
General Shear Failure
Local Shear Failure
-
8/17/2019 Bearing Capacity Theories
2/17
4/28/2016
2
5
Punching Shear Failure
Bearing Capacity Failure
• a) General Shear Failure Mostcommon type of shear failure;occurs in strong soils and rocks
• b) Local Shear FailureIntermediate between generaland punching shear failure
• c) Punching Shear Failure Occursin very loose sands weak clays
6
Bearing Capacity Failure
7
General shear failure
Local shear failure
Punching shear failure
Soil Conditions and earing
Capacity Failure
8
-
8/17/2019 Bearing Capacity Theories
3/17
4/28/2016
3
Load DisplacementCurves (after Vesicʼ (1973))
a) General Shear Failureb) Local Shear Failure
c) Punching Shear Failure
9
Comments on Shear Failure
• Usually only necessary to analyze general shearfailure.
• Local and punching shear failure can usually beanticipated by settlement analysis.
• Failure in shallow foundations is generally settlementfailure; bearing capacity failure must be analyzed,but in practical terms is usually secondary tosettlement analysis.
10
Development of Bearing CapacityTheory
• Application of limit equilibrium methods first done by Prandtlon thepunching of thick masses of metal.
• Prandtl's methods adapted by Terzaghi to bearing capacityfailure of shallow foundations.
• Vesicʼ and others improved on Terzaghi's original theory andadded other factors fora more completeanalysis
11
Assumptions for Terzaghi's Method
• Depth of foundation is less than or equal to its width
• No sliding occurs between foundation and soil(rough foundation)
• Soil beneath foundation is homogeneous semiinfinite mass
• Mohr-Coulombmodel for soil
• General shear failure mode is the governing mode(but not the only mode)
12
-
8/17/2019 Bearing Capacity Theories
4/17
4/28/2016
4
Assumptions for Terzaghi's Method
• No soil consolidationoccurs
• Foundation is very rigid relative to the soil
• Soil above bottom of foundation has no shearstrength; is only a surcharge load against theoverturning load
• Applied load is compressive and applied vertically tothe centroid of the foundation
• No appliedmoments present
13
Failure Geometry for Terzaghi's Method
14
Notes on Terzaghi's Method
• Since soil cohesion can be difficult to quantify, conservativevaluesof c (cohesion) should be used.
• Frictional strength is more reliable and doesnot need to beas conservative as cohesion.
• Terzaghi's method is simple and familiar to manygeotechnical engineers; however, it does not take intoaccount many factors, nor does it consider cases such asrectangular foundations.
15
The General Bearing Capacity Equation.
16
-
8/17/2019 Bearing Capacity Theories
5/17
4/28/2016
5
17
The General Bearing Capacity Equation.
18
Other Factors
19
Other Factors
20
• For continuous footing,s = 1
• For perpendicular load,i = 1• For level foundation,b =1
• For level ground,g =1
• Need to compute factors- Bearing Capacity Factor N,- Depth Factor d
-
8/17/2019 Bearing Capacity Theories
6/17
4/28/2016
6
Groundwater Effects
21
Groundwater Effects
Shallow groundwater affects shearstrengthin two ways:
• Reduces apparent cohesion that takes place when soils arenot saturated; may necessitate reducing the cohesionmeasuredin the laboratory
• Pore water pressure increases; reduces both effective stressand shear strength in the soil (same problem as isexperienced with unsupportedslopes)
22
Groundwater Effects
23 24
-
8/17/2019 Bearing Capacity Theories
7/17
4/28/2016
7
FOOTINGS WITH ECCENTRIC OR INCLINED LOADINGS
25
Eccentricity
Inclination
FOOTINGS WITH One Way Eccentricity
In most instances, foundations are subjectedto moments in additionto thevertical load as shown below. In such cases the distribution of pressure by
the foundation upon thesoil is notuniform.
26
27 28
-
8/17/2019 Bearing Capacity Theories
8/17
4/28/2016
8
FOOTINGS WITH One Way Eccentricity
• Note that in these equations, when the eccentricity e becomes B/6,qmin is zero.• For e > B/6, qmin will be negative, which means that tension will
develop.• Because soils can sustain very little tension, there will be a
separation between the footing and the soil under it.• Also note that the eccentricity tends to decrease the load bearing
capacity of a foundation.• In such cases, placing foundation column off-center, as shown in
Figure is probably advantageous.• Doing so in effect, produces a centrally loaded foundation with a
uniformly distributed pressure.
29
FOOTINGS WITH One Way Eccentricity
30
Footing with Two-way Eccentricities
• Consider a footing subject to a vertical ultimate load Q ult anda moment M asshown in Figures a and b. For this case, the components of the moment Mabout the x and y axisare Mx and My respectively. This condition is equivalenttoa load Q placed eccentrically on the footing with x = e B and y = e L as shownin Figured.
31
Footing with Two-way Eccentricities
32
-
8/17/2019 Bearing Capacity Theories
9/17
4/28/2016
9
33 34
35 36
-
8/17/2019 Bearing Capacity Theories
10/17
4/28/2016
10
Example 1
37
Example 1
38
Example 2
39 40
Example 2
-
8/17/2019 Bearing Capacity Theories
11/17
4/28/2016
11
Footings with Inclined Loads
41
Footings with Inclined Loads
1. Compute the inclination factors using the equations given below:
β inclination of load with respect to vertical
2. Use the inclination factors just computed to compute Hansen shapefactors as
42
Footings with Inclined Loads
3. These are used in the following modifications of the "edited“
Hansen bearing capacity equation:
Use the smaller value of qu\t computed by either ofEquations.
43
The Bearing Capacity of Multi-
Layered Soils
44
-
8/17/2019 Bearing Capacity Theories
12/17
4/28/2016
12
The Bearing Capacity of Layered Soils
45
The Bearing Capacity of Layered Soils
• In layered soil profiles, the unit weight of the soil, the angle of friction andthe cohesion are not constant throughout the depth. The ultimate surfacefailure may extend through two or more of the soil layers.
• Consider the case when the stronger soil is underlain by a weaker soil. If H,the thickness of the layer of soil below the footing, is relatively large thenthe failure surface will be completely located in the top soil layer, which isthe upper limit for the ultimate bearing capacity.
• If the thickness H is small compared to the foundation width B, a punchingshear failure will occur at the top soil stratum, followed by a general shearfailure in the bottom soil layer.
• If H is relatively deep, then the shear failure will occur only on the top soillayer.
46
The Bearing Capacity of Layered Soils
• Meyerhof and Hanna (1978) and Meyerhof(1974)
47 48
-
8/17/2019 Bearing Capacity Theories
13/17
4/28/2016
13
49 50
51 52
-
8/17/2019 Bearing Capacity Theories
14/17
4/28/2016
14
The Bearing Capacity of Layered Soils
• Meyerhof andHannas punching
shear coefficient Ks
53
The Bearing Capacity of Layered Soils
• Variationof c’ a/c’ 1
with q2/q1based on the
theory of Meyerhofand Hanna (1978)
54
55
Example on layered soils
Example on layered soils
56
-
8/17/2019 Bearing Capacity Theories
15/17
4/28/2016
15
Example on layered soils
57
Ground Factors
58
Base Factor
• For footings with angled foundation bases
• When footing is level, b = 159
RigidityFactors
60
-
8/17/2019 Bearing Capacity Theories
16/17
4/28/2016
16
Bearing Capacity from Field Tests
61
Bearing Capacity from SPT
62
Bearing Capacity from SPT
63
Bearing Capacity from SPT
64
-
8/17/2019 Bearing Capacity Theories
17/17
4/28/2016
17
Bearing Capacity using CPT
65
Bearing Capacity for FieldLoad Tests PLT
66
Bearing Capacity for Field Load Tests PLT
• For Granular Soils:
• For Cohesive Soils:
67
Correction of Standard penetration number
• It has been suggested that the SPT be standardized to some energyratio E r which should be computed as
• Note that larger values of E r decrease the blow count N nearly linearly,that is, E r45 gives N = 20 and E r90 gives N = 10;
• Example of N for E r45 = 20 we obtain for the arbitrarily chosen E r = 70,(E r70):
68N for E r70 = 13
top related