Technical University of Mombasa

Department of Building and Civil Engineering

Foundation Engineering, I (ECV 4417)

Teaching notes

By Prof Eng. Sixtus Kinyua Mwea

2021
ECV 4417 Foundation Engineering I

Syllabus

Earth pressure: activate and passive, lateral earth pressure, Rankine's theory, Coulomb's
theory.

Slope stability.

Determination of bearing capacity:

Terzaghi's analysis,

Bearing capacity tables,

Settlement: causes, analysis, consolidation process, effects on foundations,

embankments and buildings

Text Books
• Craig F R. Soil mechanics, Fourth Edition (1989) English Language Book
Society/ Van Nostrand Reinhold (international), London
• GN Smith and Ian Smith (1998) Elements of soil mechanics seventh
edition, Blackwell Science, London
• Venkatramaiah C. Geotechnical Engineering Fourth Edition 2012, New
Age International (P) Limited Publishers, New Delhi

Reference Books
• Ralph B. Peck, Walter E. Hanson and Thomas H. Thornburn (1973)
Foundation Engineering Second Edition, 1973 John Wiley and sons Inc., New
York
• Bharat Singh and Shams Prakash, Soil Mechanics and Foundation
Engineering Second Edition (1985), New chad and Bros, Roorkee, India
Table of Contents
CHAPTER TWO - EARTH PRESSURE ............................................................................... 1
2.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................ 1
2.2 Active and passive earth pressure ...................................................................... 2
2..2.1 Active pressure in cohesionless soils ............................................................. 4
2.2.2 Surcharges .......................................................................................................... 9
2.2.3 Effect of submerging on active pressure ..................................................... 10
2.2.4 Effect of Cohesion on active pressure .......................................................... 11
2.3 Earth pressure at rest ........................................................................................... 13
2.4 Passive pressure on cohesionless ...................................................................... 15
2.5 Summary of the main points ............................................................................. 18
2.6 Tutorial examples on lateral earth pressure ................................................... 19
CHAPTER THREE:-SLOPE STABILITY ............................................................................ 22
3.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................... 22
3.2 Analysis for the case of Øu = 0 ........................................................................... 23
3.3 Analysis for homogenous C-Ø soil .................................................................. 26
3.4 Method of Slices ................................................................................................... 28
3.5 Analysis of an infinite slope .............................................................................. 32
Chapter Four – Determination of Bearing Capacity ........................................................ 36
4.1 Bearing capacity of soils ..................................................................................... 36
4.1.1 Bearing capacity terms ................................................................................... 36
4.1.2 Ultimate bearing capacity .............................................................................. 37
4.2.3 The net foundation pressure ......................................................................... 47
4.2.4 Allowable bearing pressure ........................................................................... 49
4.2.5 Field methods for the determination of bearing capacity of soils ........... 50
4.2.6 Presumed bearing capacity of soils and rocks ............................................ 62
4.3 Tutorial Examples on Bearing Capacity .......................................................... 63
CHAPTER FIVE : SETTLEMENT OF SOILS ................................................................. 65
5.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................... 65
5.2 Immediate settlement for clays ......................................................................... 66
5.3 Immediate settlement cohesionless soils ........................................................ 71
5.4 Consolidation settlement for cohesive soils ................................................... 76
5.4.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................... 76
5.4.2 The odometer test............................................................................................ 77
5.4.3 Settlement by Skempton and Bjerrum Method .......................................... 88
5.4.4 Degree of consolidation ................................................................................. 92
5.4.5 Terzaghi’s Theory of One-Dimensional Consolidation Settlement ......... 95
5.4.6 Determination of coefficient of consolidation........................................... 100
5.4.7 Secondary compression................................................................................ 104
5.4.8 Correction for the construction period ...................................................... 105
Summary of Settlement ................................................................................................ 108
Tutorial Examples on Chapter Five ............................................................................ 109
CHAPTER TWO - EARTH PRESSURE

2.1 Introduction

Earth pressure problems are encountered in retaining walls, bulkheads, sheeting and
bracing in cuts, tunnels etc. Classical theories were first proposed by Coulomb in 1773
and later by a British engineer in 1857. These theories are still good today. In the
analysis conditions of plane strain are assumed. Strains in the longitudinal direction
are assumed to be zero. Rigorous treatment of this type of problem with both stresses
and displacements being considered require equilibrium and compatibility for given
boundary conditions. The rigorous analysis of earth pressure problems is rarely
possible. However, it is the failure condition of the retained soil mass which is of
primary interest and hence a concept of plastic collapse is used in lateral earth
pressures problems

It is assumed that the behavior of soil can be represented by and idealized

stress strain relationships shown on Figure 2.1 below. A soil is said to be in state of
plastic equilibrium if the shear stress at every point within the mass reaches the state
of stress represented by point Y

Y
Shear Stress

Shear strain

Figure 2. 1 Idealized stress strain relationship

There are two distinct types of lateral soil pressure namely active earth pressure and
passive lateral pressure. Figure 2.2 shows the two types of earth pressure while Figure
2.3 shows the wall movements.

Foundation Engineering - ECV 4417 -1-

- 2- Earth pressure

Active earth pressure Pa is a pressure caused by soil moving forward because of

yielding support. This is the minimum value of earth pressure.

Passive earth pressure Pp is a pressure developed by soil being pushed backward by

the support. This is the maximum value of earth pressure.

Earth pressure at rest Po is intermediate between active and passive state and exists
when there is no motion in either direction. Its value is larger than the active
pressure

Figure 2. 2 Lateral pressure on a retaining wall

Figure 2. 3 Relationship between direction of wall movement and soil pressures

2.2 Active and passive earth pressure

Considering a retaining wall with a vertical backfill and supporting a cohesionless soil
whose angle of shearing resistance is Ø and the unit weight is ɣ. The vertical stress in
the mass at a depth h is ɣh. If the wall moves forward the soil will dilate (expand) and

ECV 4417 Foundation Engineering I

- 3- Earth pressure

the will be reduction in lateral pressure at depth h. On the other hand, if the wall is
moved to the soil the lateral pressure will increase.

The lateral pressure can be reduced to a minimum valued which occurs when the
stress circle is tangential to strength envelope of the soil. The value of the lateral
pressure is Ka*ɣh. Where Ka is the coefficient of active earth pressure.

In the other case when the wall is moved towards the soil a maximum lateral pressure
is reached when the soil is in state of plastic equilibrium and equals Kp*ɣh. Where Kp
is the coefficient of passive earth pressure.

The two cases are illustrated in Figure 2.5

Figure 2. 4 Active and passive earth pressure

ECV 4417 Foundation Engineering I

- 4- Earth pressure

Figure 2. 5 Active and passive earth pressure shown in Mohr circle

2..2.1 Active pressure in cohesionless soils

The estimation of lateral pressure was initially done by Coulomb in 1776 and
Rankine in 1857. These early theories are still good today.

Rankine’s theory on cohesionless soils

Assume smooth vertical wall supporting a cohesionless soil of internal angle of

friction Ø. The wall has yielded enough to satisfy active earth pressure conditions

ECV 4417 Foundation Engineering I

- 5- Earth pressure

(Figure 2.6) In the Mohr diagram the pressure on the principle planes (vertical and
horizontal) are σ3 and σ1. The coefficient of active lateral pressure σ3/ σ1 then given by
equation 3.1

Figure 2. 6 Active pressure for cohesionless soil a) with a horizontal surface and b)
with a sloping upwards at angle β.

𝐷𝐶
𝜎3 𝑂𝐴 𝑂𝐶−𝐴𝐶 𝑂𝐶−𝐷𝐶 1− 1−𝑆𝑖𝑛Ø
𝑂𝐶
= = 𝐶𝑂+𝐴𝐶 = = 𝐷𝐶 =
𝜎1 𝑂𝐵 𝐶𝑂+𝐷𝐶 1+ 1+𝑆𝑖𝑛Ø
𝑂𝐶

Therefore
1−𝑆𝑖𝑛Ø 𝜑
𝐾𝑎 = = 𝑡𝑎𝑛2 (45𝑜 − 2 ) 31
1+𝑆𝑖𝑛Ø

For a sloping soil surface at angle β the active pressure is given the same expression

ECV 4417 Foundation Engineering I

- 6- Earth pressure

𝐶𝑜𝑠 β − √𝐶𝑜𝑠 2 β − 𝐶𝑜𝑠 2 𝜑

𝐾𝑎 = 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝛽 ∗
𝐶𝑜𝑠 β + √𝐶𝑜𝑠 2 β + 𝐶𝑜𝑠 2 𝜑

Example 2.1

Using Rankine theory, determine the total thrust on a vertical retaining wall which is
five metres high if the retained surface is horizontal. The retained earth has the
following properties Ø = 35o and ɣ = 19 kN/m3. What would be the increase in the
thrust if the backfill is at an angle of 35o to the horizontal?

Ans 64 kN and 95 kN/m per meter length of the wall

Coulomb’s wedge theory

Instead of considering the equilibrium of an element in a stressed mass Coulomb’s

theory considers the soil as a whole. If a wall supporting a cohesionless soil as shown
on Figure 2.7 is removed suddenly the soil will slump at an angle Ø on plane BC. Ø is
the angle of shearing resistance. If on the other hand the wall moves just slightly a
rupture would appear on plane BD between AB and BC. The wedge ABD would then
move down the back of the wall

Figure 2. 7 Wedge theory for cohesionless soils

Coulomb analyzed this problem in 1776 on the assumption that the surface of the
retained soil as shown on Figure 2.8 was plane and obtained Equation 3.2
2
𝐶𝑜𝑠𝑒𝑐𝜓 ∗sin (𝜓−Ø)
𝐾𝑎 = { sin(𝜓+δ)∗sin (Ø−β)
} 32
√sin (𝜓+δ)+√ sin (𝜓−β)

Where: -

𝜓 is the angle of back of wall to the horizontal

𝛿 is the angle of wall friction

β is the inclination of the surface of the retained soil to the horizontal

ECV 4417 Foundation Engineering I

- 7- Earth pressure

Ø is the angle of frication of the retained soil

The total active thrust is ½*Ka ɣ H2 where H is the total height of the wall. This
thrust acts at angle 𝛿 to the normal of the wall. The Coulomb equation reduces to
Rankine formula when Ψ is equal to 90o for a vertical wall and 𝛿 = β

𝐶𝑜𝑠 β − √(𝐶𝑜𝑠 2 β − 𝐶𝑜𝑠 2 𝜑)

𝐾𝑎 = 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝛽 ∗
𝐶𝑜𝑠 β + √(𝐶𝑜𝑠 2 β − 𝐶𝑜𝑠 2 𝜑)

and further reduces to

1−𝑆𝑖𝑛Ø 𝜑
𝐾𝑎 = = 𝑡𝑎𝑛2 (45𝑜 − 2 )
1+𝑆𝑖𝑛Ø

When 𝜓 = 90𝑜 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝛿 = 0

Figure 2. 8 Symbols used in the Coulomb’s formula

Aide memoir

Cosec α= 1/sin α

Sec α= 1/Cos α

Cot α = 1/tan α

Colman line construction

When the surface of the retained earth is irregular Coulombs solution is best done
graphically. The procedure is to select a series of trial wedges and then finding one
that exerts the maximum thrust on the wall. A wedge is acted upon by three forces
as follows:

W the weight of the wedge

Pa the reaction from the wall

R the reaction on the plane of failure

ECV 4417 Foundation Engineering I

- 8- Earth pressure

In Figure 2.9 four trial wedges have been done. The weight of each trial slice is
obtained. Starting at a point X these weights are set off vertically as points d1 d2 etc.
A separate triangle for each of the four wedges is constructed to complete the polygon
of forces. A smooth curve is drawn through points e1 e2 e3 and e4. The maximum
thrust on the wall is represented by length ed. The actual failure plane can be
constructed on the space diagram. Angle e3Xe2 on the force diagram is equal to and
EBD on the space. While angle eXe2 on the force diagram is equal to angle GBD on
the space diagram. Hence plane BG is obtained.

Figure 2. 9 Colman line construction

Example 3.2

Using Coulomb theory, determine the total thrust on a vertical retaining wall which
is five metres high if the retained surface is horizontal. The retained earth has the
following properties Ø = 35o and ɣ = 19 kN/m3. What would be the increase in the
thrust if the backfill is at an angle of 35o to the horizontal? Assume that 𝛿 = 0.5Ø

Ans 55.7 kN and 104 kN/m per meter length of the wall

Point of application of total active thrust

With either Rankine or Coulomb, the total active thrust is given by Equation 3.3. the
point of application is shown on Figure 2.10.
𝟏
𝑷𝒂 = = ∗ 𝜸 ∗ 𝑯𝟐 ∗ 𝑲 𝒂 Eq 2. 1
𝟐

Figure 2. 10 Point of application of total active thrust

ECV 4417 Foundation Engineering I

- 9- Earth pressure

2.2.2 Surcharges

The extra load carried by a retaining wall is known as surcharges and can be a uniform
load or a line load. The surcharges induce extra lateral load to the retaining walls.

Uniform load

The extra load is considered as an equivalent height of fill as shown on Figure 2.11

For a cohesionless soil

Pa = Kaɣh + Kaws

Kaws = Kaɣhe therefore he=ws/ɣ

Figure 2. 11 Effect of surcharge on a retaining wall

In the most general case of a sloping backfill and a sloping retaining wall the he is
given by Equation 3.5
𝒘𝒔 𝐬𝐢𝐧 𝝍
𝒉𝒆 = ∗ 𝐬𝐢𝐧 ( 𝝍+𝜷) 3.3
ɣ

Where the symbols are shown on Figure 2.12

he is the equivalent height

ws is the intensity of the uniform load per unit area

ψ is the angle of back of wall to the horizontal

β is the angle of inclination of the retained soil

ECV 4417 Foundation Engineering I

- 10- Earth pressure

Figure 2. 12 Nomenclature at the back of a retaining wall

The pressure at the back of the wall due to surcharge is p u = Ka* ɣ* he is distributed
along the height of the wall. Its centre is at half the wall height. This is added to the
thrust due to the earth to give the overall effect. It is usual to always allow some
surcharge just in case the retaining wall in future supports plant movement during
construction or unforeseen surcharge in future

Line load

The lateral thrust acting on the back of a wall as a result of a line load surcharge is
estimated as a horizontal force of magnitude KaWL. Its point of application is shown
on Figure 2.13.

Figure 2. 13 Line load effect on a retaining wall

2.2.3 Effect of submerging on active pressure

The active earth pressure is only applied on effective stress and not on total stress. The
active pressure in a submerged fill can be summarized as follows in Equation 2.2and
Figure 2.14

Pa at depth H = Ka*ɣH1 +Kaɣsub*H2 +ɣwH2 Eq 2. 2

ECV 4417 Foundation Engineering I

- 11- Earth pressure

Figure 2.14 lateral pressure on partially submerged backfill soil

2.2.4 Effect of Cohesion on active pressure

Rankine’s theory on cohesive

Consider a soil with frictional soil with the angle of shearing resistance Ø and a unit
cohesion c. The Mohr circle diagram for the soil is shown in Figure 2.14

Figure 2. 15 Mohr circle with friction Ø and cohesion c

Referring to Figure 3.14

𝟏
𝑺𝒊𝒏 𝝋 = 𝟐 (𝝈𝟏 − 𝝈𝟑 )
𝟏
𝟐 (𝝈𝟏 + 𝝈𝟑 + 𝟐𝒄 ∗ 𝒄𝒐𝒕𝝋)
After some rearrangement

𝟏−𝒔𝒊𝒏𝝋 𝟏−𝒔𝒊𝒏𝝋
𝝈𝟑 = 𝝈𝟏 (𝟏+𝒔𝒊𝒏𝝋 ) − 𝟐𝒄√(𝟏+𝒔𝒊𝒏𝝋 ) 3.4

As stated earlier

σ3 is the lateral pressure

σ1 is equal to ɣ*h
1−sinφ
Ka = 1+sinφ

ECV 4417 Foundation Engineering I

- 12- Earth pressure

Equation 3.2 can be written as: -

𝒑𝒂 = 𝑲𝒂 ɣ ∗ 𝐡 − 𝟐𝒄√𝐊 𝒂 3.5

Or
𝛗
𝒑𝒂 = 𝑲𝒂 ɣ ∗ 𝐡 − 𝟐𝒄 ∗ 𝒕𝒂𝒏 (𝟒𝟓𝒐 − ) 3.6
𝟐

This equation was formulated by Bell in 1915 and is often referred to as Bells solution.
The active pressure diagram for such a soil is shown in Figure 2.15 the negative values
of pa extending down to a depth hc indicate that this zone is in tension and since the
soil cannot sustain tension the soil cracks to a depth hc

Figure 2. 16 Active pressure diagram for a soil with both cohesive and frictional
strength

Depth of tension zone

The depth of the tension zone (hc) is obtained by equating the active pressure in
equation 3.4 to zero.
𝛗
𝒑𝒂 = 𝑲𝒂 ɣ ∗ 𝐡𝐜 − 𝟐𝒄 ∗ 𝒕𝒂𝒏 (𝟒𝟓𝒐 − ) =𝟎
𝟐

𝟐𝒄 𝝋
𝒉𝒄 = ∗ 𝒕𝒂𝒏 (𝟒𝟓𝒐 − ) 3.7
ɣ𝑲𝒂 𝟐

𝟐𝒄 𝝋
Or 𝒉𝒄 = ∗ 𝒕𝒂𝒏 (𝟒𝟓𝒐 + ) 3.8
ɣ 𝟐

𝟐𝒄
Or 𝒉𝒄 = 3.9
ɣ√𝑲𝒂

For a purely cohesive soil where Ø=0

𝟐𝒄
𝒉𝒄 = ɣ

Gravels sands and silts generally operate in undrained states and cracks do not
develop in them. Cracks occur in undrained clays. If there is surcharge acting on the
surface of the retained soil such that its equivalent height is hc then the depth of the

ECV 4417 Foundation Engineering I

- 13- Earth pressure

tension zone is equal to zero. If on the other hand the surcharge equivalent height is
more than the depth to the tension zone no tension zone will occur.

Coulomb’s theory on cohesive soils

The theory assumes that at the top there is a zone within which there is no friction or
cohesive effects in the cracked zones. The depth zo is equal to hc or hc-he in the case
where there is a surcharge of equivalent height he. Figure 2.16 shows the Culmann
construction adopted to allow for cohesion.

There are now five forces on the wedge as follows

W is the weight of the wedge ABED (Obtained from the cross-section area and
the unit weight

Cw is the adhesive force e along BF of wall (Cw = cw*BF: cw = cu or 50kN/m2

whichever is less)

C is the cohesive force the rupture plane BE (C = c*BE)

R is the reaction on the plane of failure (Determined from the graphical

construction)

Pa is the resultant thrust on the wall (Determined from the graphical

construction)

Figure 2. 17 Culmann construction allowing for cohesion

2.3 Earth pressure at rest

The vertical strain at a particle in a soil from theoretical consideration is as follows

ECV 4417 Foundation Engineering I

- 14- Earth pressure

𝜎𝑣
𝜀=
𝐸

σv

σh

σh

The lateral strain from elastic analysis and relationship of poisons ratio and vertical
and horizontal strains is as follows
𝜎ℎ 𝜎𝑣 𝜎ℎ
𝜀ℎ = − 𝜇( + )
𝐸 𝐸 𝐸
In the at rest conditions the lateral strain is equal to zero and the ratio of horizontal
stress and the vertical stress can be as shown as follows
h 
=
 v 1− 
 h = k o v = k oz

ko is the coefficient of earth pressure at rest and typical values are shown on Table 1.1

Table 1.1 Typical values of ko

Loose sand 0.4

Dense sand 0.6

Tamped sand 0.8

Soft clay 0.6

Hard clay 0.5

The resultant force per unit width of a wall of earth pressure at rest of a wall as shown
on Figure 2.17 is given by
𝑯
𝑷𝒐 = ∫𝟎 𝒌𝒐 𝜸𝒛𝒅𝒛 = 𝟏/𝟐𝒌𝒐 𝜸𝑯𝟐
3.10

ECV 4417 Foundation Engineering I

- 15- Earth pressure

γz
H

dz σh

Figure 2. 18 Lateral earth pressure at rest

2.4 Passive pressure on cohesionless

Rankine’s theory (soil surface horizontal)

In the derivation for the equations of active pressure the movement of the soil was
away from the wall. In the case of passive pressure, the wall moves into the soil. For
this condition the vertical pressure σ3 is the minor principal stress i.e. σ3 = ɣz. The
value of σ1 is reached when the Mohr Circle touches the failure envelope with σ3 as the
minor principal stress. Figure 3.14 is duplicated here as Figure 2.19 for ease of
reference

Figure 2. 19 Mohr circle with friction Ø and cohesion c

In this case the horizontal stress is the passive pressure and is obtained by rearranging
equation 3.2 shown below the equation for the passive pressure is shown on equation
3.9

From equation 3.2

𝟏−𝒔𝒊𝒏𝝋 𝟏−𝒔𝒊𝒏𝝋
𝝈𝟑 = 𝝈𝟏 (𝟏+𝒔𝒊𝒏𝝋 ) − 𝟐𝒄√(𝟏+𝒔𝒊𝒏𝝋 )

ECV 4417 Foundation Engineering I

- 16- Earth pressure

Rearranging the equation to get the passive pressure 𝜎1 and equating c to zero
𝟏+𝒔𝒊𝒏𝝋
𝝈𝟏 = 𝝈𝟑 (𝟏−𝒔𝒊𝒏𝝋 ) 3.11

The coefficient of passive pressure is

𝟏 + 𝒔𝒊𝒏𝝋 𝝋
𝑲𝒑 = ( ) = 𝒕𝒂𝒏𝟐 (𝟒𝟓𝒐 + )
𝟏 − 𝒔𝒊𝒏𝝋 𝟐
𝛗
As with active pressure, there is a network of shear planes inclined at (𝟒𝟓𝐨 − 𝟐 ) to the
direction of major principal stress but this time the soil is being compressed. Figure
2.20

Figure 2. 20 Active and passive states showing the failure planes

Rankine’s theory (soil surface sloping at angle β)

The passive pressure act parallel to the slope. The analysis gives the coefficient of
passive pressure

𝐶𝑜𝑠 β + √(𝐶𝑜𝑠 2 β − 𝐶𝑜𝑠 2 𝜑)

𝐾𝑝 = 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝛽 ∗
𝐶𝑜𝑠 β − √(𝐶𝑜𝑠 2 β − 𝐶𝑜𝑠 2 𝜑)

It is to be noted that the assumption here is that the wall is smooth with friction.
This in practice can lead to conservative design of the walls.

Coulomb’s theory

With the assumption of a plane failure surface leading to a wedge failure the
expression for Kp for a granular soil is given by Equation 2.3

ECV 4417 Foundation Engineering I

- 17- Earth pressure

𝟐
𝑪𝒐𝒔𝒆𝒄𝝍 ∗𝐬𝐢𝐧 (𝝍−Ø)
𝑲𝒑 = { 𝐬𝐢𝐧(𝝍+𝛅)∗𝐬𝐢𝐧 (Ø+𝛃)
} Eq 2.3
√𝐬𝐢𝐧 (𝝍−𝛅)−√ 𝐬𝐢𝐧 (𝝍−𝛃)

The expressions have the same meaning as that for the coefficient of active pressure
equation. The expression reduces to
1+𝑠𝑖𝑛Ø
𝐾𝑝 = 1−𝑠𝑖𝑛Ø

When ψ=90o, δ =0o and β=0o

Estimation of passive pressure leads to overestimation of the passive force leading to

conservative design of the walls. Results from experimental work suggest values of
Kp as shown on Table 2.1

Table 2. 1 values of Kp for cohesionless soils (Smith and Smith 1998)

Effect of cohesion on passive pressure

Rankine’s Theory

From equation 3.2

𝟏−𝒔𝒊𝒏𝝋 𝟏−𝒔𝒊𝒏𝝋
𝝈𝟑 = 𝝈𝟏 (𝟏+𝒔𝒊𝒏𝝋 ) − 𝟐𝒄√(𝟏+𝒔𝒊𝒏𝝋 )

Then

𝟏+𝒔𝒊𝒏𝝋 𝟏+𝒔𝒊𝒏𝝋
𝝈𝟏 = 𝝈𝟑 (𝟏−𝒔𝒊𝒏𝝋 ) − 𝟐𝒄√(𝟏−𝒔𝒊𝒏𝝋 )

If

ECV 4417 Foundation Engineering I

- 18- Earth pressure

𝟏+𝒔𝒊𝒏𝝋
𝑲𝒑 = (𝟏−𝒔𝒊𝒏𝝋)

𝒑𝒑 = 𝑲𝒑 ∗ 𝜸𝒉 + 𝟐𝒄√𝑲𝒑

Figure 2.21 compares active and passive pressure distributions behind a vertical wall
with

Figure 2.21 Active and passive pressure distributions

Coulomb’s Theory

Estimation of passive pressure when cohesion has been added to the soil becomes
complicated and empirical approach is usually recommended. The value of horizontal
pressure can be estimated from the equation 2.

Pph = Kpɣh +cKpc

Where c is the operative value of cohesion and Kp and Kpc are given in Table 2.

2.5 Summary of the main points

1) The lateral pressure influences the design of earth retaining structures. The
most common is the retaining wall

ECV 4417 Foundation Engineering I

- 19- Earth pressure

2) The limiting values of lateral pressure occur when the wall yields away from
the back fill or towards the backfill. These lateral pressures are referred to as
active and passive. The pressure exerted when there is no movement of the
wall is known as at rest pressure

3) Very little movement is needed to yield the active pressure while a relatively
large moment is needed to mobilize the passive pressure.

4) The classical earth pressure theories by Rankine in 1857 and Coulomb in 1776
have stood the test of time. The distribution of pressure is considered
triangular when the soil is uniform, without cohesion, no surcharge and no
water pressure.

5) Effective pressure theory should be used in estimation of lateral pressure

when cohesion, surcharge and water pressure are present in the soil behind
the retaining wall.

6) Cohesion results in formation of tension cracks at the ground surface

7) 𝒑𝒂 = 𝑲𝒂 ɣ ∗ 𝐡 − 𝟐𝒄√𝐊 𝒂

8) 𝒑𝒑 = 𝑲𝒑 ɣ ∗ 𝐡 + 𝟐𝒄√𝐊 𝒑

2.6 Tutorial examples on lateral earth pressure

Q1) Rankine's lateral earth pressure with horizontal backfill

The height of a retaining wall is 3.6 metres. Due to the backfill it rotates at point 0.6
metres from the bottom of the wall as shown on the Figure below.

A
Angle of soil φ= 30

3.0m γ = 18kN/m3.

0.6m
B

Using Rankine's lateral earth pressure, Determine and plot the

i) Rankine active pressure of the portion AO above the line of rotation at the back
of the wall.

ECV 4417 Foundation Engineering I

- 20- Earth pressure

ii) Rankine active pressure of the portion OB in front of the wall below the level
of rotation

iii) Rankine p pressure of the portion OB at the back of the wall below the level of
rotation

iv) Plot the pressure diagram of the whole wall and determine the forces acting on
it

Q2) Earth pressure with slope backfill.

The details of a retaining wall are as follows: -

• The height of a retaining wall is H = 3.6 metres.

Friction Angle of soil φ= 30

δ =2/3* φ
3.
3.6m γ = 18kN/m
Backfill slope = 20o.
10o
Slope of wall = 100 to the vertical

a) Using Rankine's lateral earth pressure theory

i. Determine total active force, Pa, per metre width of wall

ii. Determine total passive force, Pp per metre width of wall

b) Using Coulombs lateral earth pressure theory

iii. Determine total force, Pa per metre width of wall

iv. Determine total passive force, Pp per metre width of wall

(In the use of Coulombs theory get Ka from the equation in the notes and Kp
from Table 2.1 in the notes)

Q3) For the retaining wall shown on Figure Q3.

i) Determine the lateral earth force at rest per unit length of the wall.

ii) Determine the active lateral earth force at rest per unit length of the
wall.

ECV 4417 Foundation Engineering I

- 21- Earth pressure

iii) Determine the location of the resultant of the forces in the two cases

iv) Assume that Ko is given by the equation: - Ko = 1- sin φ

γ = 16.5kN/m3

2.5m φ = 30o
C’ = 0
water table
γsat = 19.3kN/m3
2.5m
φ = 30o

Figure Q3

Q4 A retaining wall is 6m high. It is to retain a soil of unit weight γ = 16.5kN/m3,

φ = 26o C’ = 14.36 kN/m2.

Determine:

i) The Rankine active pressure per unit length of the wall before and after
the cracks have developed

ii) Determine the line of action of the forces in both cases

iii) Determine the forces if the cracks fill with water

ECV 4417 Foundation Engineering I

CHAPTER THREE:-SLOPE STABILITY

3.1 Introduction

Earth slopes are found in nature or in manmade structures. Such slopes include road
embankments, earth dam walls etc. Slope stability is typically the potential of these
slopes to withstand and undergo movement. Stability is determined by the balance of
shear stress and shear strength. An otherwise stable slope may be affected by
preparatory factors, making the slope conditionally unstable. Triggering factors of a
slope failure can be climatic events can then make a slope actively unstable, leading
slope failure also referred to as mass failure. Mass movements can be caused by
increase in shear stress, such as loading, lateral pressure, and transient forces.
Alternatively, shear strength may be decreased by weathering and/or changes in pore
water pressure. Typical slope failures are shown on Figure 3.1

In practice if the forces available to resist movement are greater than the forces
driving movement, the slope is considered stable. This is called limiting equilibrium.
A factor of safety is calculated by dividing the forces resisting movement by the forces
driving movement. In earthquake-prone areas, the analysis is typically run for static
conditions and pseudo-static conditions, where the seismic forces from an earthquake
are assumed to add static loads to the analysis. Figure slopes encountered in practice.
In practice it is normal to analyses the slopes assuming two dimensional failures. This
approach gives a conservative result. The conservative result is good due to the large
number of uncertainties.

Figure 3.1 Typical slopes (After Craig 1987)

Foundation Engineering - ECV 4417 -22-

 - 23- Slope Stability

3.2 Analysis for the case of Øu = 0

This analysis considers the slope under undrained conditions. The slope is made up
of clay and typically considered as immediate after construction of a slope when time
has not passed to allow drainage to occur. Figure 3.2 shows a typical of Øu = 0 slope

Assumptions

The potential failure surface is a circular arc. A trial circular arc of radius r at assumed
center O and length of arc La. The slope instability is coursed by the total weight W
per unit length above the failure surface. For equilibrium the shear strength which is
mobilized is expressed is a fraction of the available shear strength as shown in
Equations 2.1 to 2.3

Figure 3.2 Øu = 0 analysis

𝝉𝒇 𝑪𝒖
𝝉𝒎 = = Equation 3.1
𝑭 𝑭

F is the factor of safety with respect to shear strength

Equate moments about O

𝑪𝒖
𝑾∗𝒅= ∗ 𝑳𝒂 ∗ 𝒓 Equation 3.2
𝑭

𝑪𝒖 ∗𝑳𝒂 𝒓
𝑭= Equation 3.3
𝑾∗𝒅

In the event tension cracks develop as shown a hydrostatic force acting normal to the
crack in the event of the crack is filled with water. The resisting surface La is reduced

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

 - 24- Slope Stability

accordingly in the analysis. To obtain the Factor of safety which will course failure a
number of trial surfaces are analyzed to obtain the one with the minimum factor of
safety

For slopes made from two different materials the ratio cm/γH has been shown to be
the same provided that the two soils have the same angle of internal friction. The ratio
is known as stability number and is known as stability number.

Based on this geometric similarity principles Taylor in 1937 published stability

coefficient for homogenous slopes. The charts give a value of Ns which is related to
the slope height H and slope β and the factor D where DH is the depth to firm strata.
The chart is shown on Figure 2.3
𝑪
𝒖
𝑵𝒔 = 𝑭∗𝜸∗𝑯 Equation 3.4

Example 3.1

A 450 slope is excavated to a depth of 8 meters in deep layer of saturated clay of unit
weight of 19 kN/m3. The relevant strength parameters are Cu= 65kN/m3 and Øu = 0.
The slope is shown in Figure 9.4 below. Assume that the cross-section area is 70m2.

Weight of the soil mass = 70*19 = 1330 kN/m

The centroid of ABCD is 4.5m from O

Angle AOC is 89 ½o

The radius is 12.1m and the arc length is 18.9m

𝟔𝟓∗𝟏𝟖.𝟗∗𝟏𝟐.𝟏
𝑭= = 2.48 Equation 3.5
𝟏𝟑𝟑𝟎∗𝟒.𝟓

This is the factor of safety for the trial failure surface selected and not necessarily the
minimum factor of safety.

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

 - 25- Slope Stability

The minimum factor of safety is obtained from Equation 3.4

β = 45, Depth factor is large and the value of Ns the stability number is 0.18

𝐶
𝑢
𝑁𝑠 = 𝐹∗𝛾∗𝐻

Therefore
𝑪𝒖 𝟔𝟓
𝑭=𝑵 = = 2.37 Equation 3.6
𝒔 ∗𝜸∗𝑯 𝟎.𝟏𝟖∗𝟏𝟗∗𝟖

Figure 3.3 Taylor’s stability coefficient for Ø=0 and example 3.1 slope

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

 - 26- Slope Stability

3.3 Analysis for homogenous C-Ø soil

The ratio shown on Equation 3.4 is known as the stability number where the value c u
can be replaced with Cm, the mobilized cohesion with regard to total stress ɣH. And
can be rewritten as shown in Equation 3.7
𝑪
𝒎
𝑵𝒔 = 𝜸∗𝑯 Equation 3.7

It has been established that for β>53o the critical circle always passes through the toe.
When Ø=0 and β>53o the slip circle extends to a considerable depth.

Taylor in 1948 prepared two curves that relate the stability number to the angle of the
slope. The first set of curves is the general case for total stress analysis for a c-Ø soil
(Figure 3.4) is for the general C- Ø soil.

Figure 3.5 on the other hand represents a soil that has a layer of stiff rock or stiff
material which cannot be penetrated by the failure circle. The stiff layer is at depth
DH

Figure 3.4 Curves for total stress analysis, For Ø=0 and β<53o use Figure 3.5 (After
Smith and Smith)

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

 - 27- Slope Stability

Figure 3.5 Curves allowing depth limitation (for β<53o use Figure 3.4) (note
c/ɣH=0.18 for D= ∞ for all values of β)

Example 3.2

An embankment has a slope I vertical and 2 horizontal. The properties of the soil are
c=25kN/m2 and Ø = 200 ɣ = 16kN/m3 and H = 31. Use Taylor’s charts to determine
the factor of safety of the slope.

With

Ø = 200 , Inclination of 1: 2 = 26o 30’ the stability number is 0.017

𝐶𝑚
= 0.017 ie 𝐶𝑚 = 0.017 ∗ 16 ∗ 31 = 8.43kN/m2
𝛾𝐻

𝑆ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝑆𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡ℎ 𝑐+𝜎𝑡𝑎𝑛Ø

Now Factor of safety 𝐹 = ie 𝐹=
𝐷𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑏𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑠ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑟 𝜏

The factor of safety is the same for cohesion (𝑐 )and friction (Ø) and disturbing shear
can be rewritten as

𝑐 𝜎𝑡𝑎𝑛Ø
𝜏= +
𝐹 𝐹

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

 - 28- Slope Stability

Therefore try (F=1.5 for Ø)

𝑡𝑎𝑛Ø 0.364
= = 0.242 tangent of angle 13.5o
𝐹 1.5

Using this value of Ø a new value of the stability number is established as N = .047

Cm = 0.047*16*31 = 23.3 kN/m2 (this is the mobilized cohesion with a mobilized Ø of

13.5o

F (for C) = 25/23.3 =1.07

The actual F lies between 1.07 and 1.5

Tutorial Try F = 1.2, 1.3, 1.4 for Øand check for C

3.4 Method of Slices

In this method the potential failure surface is assumed to be circular. Figure 3.6.
Represents such a slope. The soil mass ABCD is divided into slices of width b. The
base of the slice is assumed to be a straight line. For each slice the inclination to the
horizontal is α and the height measured on the centerline is h. The factor of safety is
defined by equation 3.8
𝝉𝒇
𝑭= Equation 3.8
𝝉𝒎

Where

τf Is the available shear strength

τm Is the mobilized shear strength

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

 - 29- Slope Stability

Figure 3.6 The method of slices (After Craig 1987)

The forces acting on the slices are as follows

1) The total weight of the slice W = ɣ*b*h (ɣsat where appropriate).

2) The total normal force N on the base has two components namely effective
normal force N’ and equal to σ’*l and the boundary water force U equal to
u*l. l is the length of the base while u is the pore water pressure

3) The total shear force is T = 𝝉𝒎 ∗ 𝒍

4) The total normal forces on the sides are E1 and E2

5) The shear forces on the sides are X1 and X2

6) The problem is indeterminate and to proceed it is normal to assume E1 = E2

and X1 = X2

Solution to the factor of safety equation

The sum of the moment of the shear forces T on the failure arc AC about O must
equal the moment of the weight of the all the slices (the moment of the mass ABCD
about O

∑T*r = ∑W*r*sin α Equation 3.9

𝝉𝒇 ∗𝒍
𝑻 = 𝝉𝒎 ∗ 𝒍 = Equation 3.10
𝑭

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

 - 30- Slope Stability

∑T = ∑W*sin α
𝝉𝒇 ∗𝒍
∑ = ∑𝑾 ∗ 𝒔𝒊𝒏 𝜶 Equation 3.11
𝑭

𝒇 ∑ 𝝉 ∗𝒍
F= ∑𝑾∗𝒔𝒊𝒏 Equation 3.12
𝜶

For analysis in terms of effective stress

∑ (𝒄′ +𝛔’𝐭𝐚𝐧Ø)𝒍
F= Equation 3.13
∑𝑾∗𝒔𝒊𝒏 𝜶

or
𝒄′𝑳𝒂+ 𝐭𝐚𝐧Ø∑𝐍′
F= Equation 3.14
∑𝑾∗𝒔𝒊𝒏 𝜶

Equation 3.13 is exact but the solution requires the estimation of N’ which is
challenging. The value of N’ is basically an estimate. We shall look at one solution to
the equation.

The Fellenius solution

In this solution the resultant of the inter-slice forces is zero.

𝑵′ = 𝑾𝒄𝒐𝒔𝜶 – 𝒖𝒍

Rewriting Equation 3.14

𝒄′𝑳𝒂+ 𝐭𝐚𝐧Ø∑(𝑾𝒄𝒐𝒔𝜶 –𝒖𝒍)
F= Equation 3.15
∑𝑾∗𝒔𝒊𝒏 𝜶

The components Wcos𝜶 and Wsin𝜶 can be determined graphically fro each slice. The
value of 𝜶 can be measured or calculated. Trial surfaces are chosen to obtain a
minimum factor of safety. For a purely cohesive soil Øu = 0 and Equation 3.16 reduces
to

𝒄′𝑳
F= ∑𝑾∗𝒔𝒊𝒏
𝒂
Equation 3.16
𝜶

Example 3.1

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

 - 31- Slope Stability

Using the Fellenius method of slices determine the factor of safety in terms of effective
stress of the slope shown on Figure 9.6 of the given failure surface. The unit weight (ɣ)
of the soil above and below the water table is 20kN/m3 and the relevant shear strength
parameters are C’= 10kN/m2 and Ø = 29o

The factor of safety is obtained from Equation 3.15 above

Figure 3.7 Example 3.1

𝒄′𝑳𝒂+ 𝐭𝐚𝐧Ø∑(𝑾𝒄𝒐𝒔𝜶 –𝒖𝒍)

F= ∑𝑾∗𝒔𝒊𝒏 𝜶

The exercise is to obtain all the components of the equation graphically and from a
table developed for ease of computation.

W = ɣ*b*h = 20*1.5*h = 30h kN/m

The height h is set off below the center of the base. The components hcos𝜶 and
hsin𝜶 are determined graphically and presented in Table

Wcos𝜶= 30h*cos𝜶

Wsin𝜶= 30h*sin𝜶

Table 3. 1 Columns for Fellenius Solution

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

 - 32- Slope Stability

Slice no hcos𝜶 (m) hsinn𝜶 (m) U kN/m2 l ul

1 .75 -.15 5.9 1.55 9.1

2 1.8 -.10 11.8 1.5 17.7

3 2.7 0.4 16.2 1.55 25.1

8 0.55 0.95 0 2.15 0

Totals 17.50 8.45 14.35 132

From Table 3.1

∑Wcos𝜶= ∑30h*cos𝜶 = 30 * 17.5 = 525 kN/m

∑Wsin𝜶= ∑30h*sin𝜶 = 30 * 8.45 = 254 kN/m

∑(𝑾𝒄𝒐𝒔𝜶 – 𝒖𝒍) = 525-132 = 393 kN/m

𝟏𝟎∗𝟏𝟒.𝟑𝟓+𝟎.𝟓𝟓𝟒∗𝟑𝟗𝟑
F= = 1.42
𝟐𝟓𝟒

This is a factor of safety for the trial circular plane. YOU HAVE TO TRY OTHER
CIRCLES UNTIL YOU GET THE MINIMUM FACOTR OF SAFETY

.5 Analysis of an infinite slope

It is assumed that the potential failure surface is parallel to the surface. A number of
assumptions are taken for analysis to proceed (See Figure 3.8)

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

 - 33- Slope Stability

Figure 3.8 Infinite slope (After Craig 1987)

• The flow net has flow lines parallel to the surface.

• The failure surface is at a depth small compared to the length of the slope.

• The forces at ends of any slice are equal and opposite

• The water table is parallel to the surface. This is a condition which is present
in many slopes during sustained rainfall in steep parts of the country

The shear strength at the failure plane is

𝝉𝒇 = 𝐜’ + (𝛔 − 𝐮)𝐭𝐚𝐧𝛗’ Equation 3.17

And applying the factor of safety

𝝉𝒇
𝑭 = Equation 3.18
𝝉

The expressions for 𝛔, 𝝉 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐮 are derived from the application of forces and
geometry of the infinite slope

𝟏 𝟏
𝒄𝒐𝒔𝜷 = 𝒕𝒉𝒆𝒓𝒆𝒇𝒐𝒓𝒆 𝒍 =
𝒍 𝒄𝒐𝒔𝜷

𝑾𝒄𝒐𝒔𝜷
𝛔 = = {(𝟏 − 𝐦)𝛄 + 𝐦 ∗ 𝛄𝐬𝐚𝐭 }𝒛𝒄𝒐𝒔𝟐 𝜷
𝒍

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

 - 34- Slope Stability

𝑾𝒔𝒊𝒏𝜷
𝝉 = = {(1 − m)γ + m ∗ γsat }𝑧𝒔𝒊𝒏𝜷 𝒄𝒐𝒔𝛽
𝒍
𝒖 = 𝐦𝑧𝛾𝑤 𝑐𝑜𝑠 2 𝛽

When C’=0 and m= 0 the soil is not fully saturated

𝒕𝒂𝒏𝛗’
𝑭 = 𝒕𝒂𝒏𝛃

When C’=0 and m =1 the soil is not fully saturated

𝛄 ’∗ 𝐭𝒂𝒏𝛗’
𝑭 = 𝛄𝐬𝐚𝐭 ∗ 𝒕𝒂𝒏𝛃

Example 3.2

A long natural slope in a fissured over consolidated clay is inclined at 12o to the
horizontal. The water table is at the surface and seepage is roughly parallel to the
surface. A slip has developed at a depth of 5metres. The saturated unit weight of clay
is 20kN/m3. The peak strength parameters are C’= 10kN/m2 and Ø = 26o. The
residual strength parameters are Cr= 0kN/m2 and Ø𝑟 = 18o. Determine the factor of
safety in terms of the (A) peak strength and (b) in terms of the residual strength.

With the water at the surface m = 1

𝛔 = {(𝟏 − 𝐦)𝛄 + 𝐦 ∗ 𝛄𝐬𝐚𝐭 }𝒛𝒄𝒐𝒔𝟐 𝜷

= 𝛄𝐬𝐚𝐭 * 𝒛𝒄𝒐𝒔𝟐 𝜷

=20*5*cos212 =95.5kN/m2

𝜏 = {(1 − m)γ + m ∗ γsat }𝑧𝑠𝑖𝑛𝛽 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝛽

=γsat * 𝑧𝑠𝑖𝑛𝛽 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝛽

= 20*5*sin120*cos 12o = 20.3 kN/m2

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

 - 35- Slope Stability

𝑢 = m𝑧𝛾𝑤 𝑐𝑜𝑠 2 𝛽

=5*20*𝑐𝑜𝑠 2 12 = 46.8 kN/m2

𝝉𝒇 = 𝐜’ + (𝛔 − 𝐮)𝐭𝐚𝐧𝛗’

=10+(95.5-46.8) *tan26o = 33.8 kN/m2

𝟑𝟑.𝟖
𝑭 = = 1.66
𝟐𝟎.𝟑

The factor of safety using residual strength parameters. When C’=0 and m =1 the
soil is not fully saturated is from equation

γ ’∗ t𝑎𝑛φ’
𝐹 = γsat ∗ 𝑡𝑎𝑛β

(𝟐𝟎−𝟗.𝟖) 𝐭𝐚𝐧 𝟏𝟖𝐨

= = 0.78
𝟐𝟎 ∗ 𝒕𝒂𝒏𝟏𝟐𝐨

The slope is failing at residual strength parameters. This is what causes eventual slip
in otherwise stable ground during sustained rainfall

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

Chapter Four – Determination of Bearing Capacity

4.1 Bearing capacity of soils

Introduction

Foundations that are encountered in practice may be classified into two broad
categories namely shallow and deep foundations. Two fundamental requirements are
needed for design include adequate bearing capacity of the soil and tolerable
settlement: -

• Adequacy of FOS against shear failure

• 3 to 5 is usually specified.

• Tolerable settlement

• In particular differential settlement

• The allowable bearing capacity is defined as the pressure which may be applied
to the soil to enable the two fundamental conditions to be satisfied

The design process requires

• First determine the allowable bearing

• Then size the foundation based on the allowable bearing capacity.

• Determination of settlement and ensure that it is acceptable

This chapter will deal with determination of bearing capacity. The next chapter will
deal with settlement. The actual design of the structures will be dealt with in ECV
4416

4.1.1 Bearing capacity terms

The following terms are used in bearing capacity problems

Ultimate bearing capacity is the value of the average contact pressure between the
foundation and the soil which will produce shear failure in the soil.

The net foundation pressure is the increase in the pressure at the foundation level due to
the structure loads

Foundation Engineering - ECV 4417 -36-

37 Bearing Capacity

The safe net foundation pressure is the net foundation pressure divided by a suitable
factor of safety

Allowable bearing pressure is the maximum allowable net loading intensity on the soil
allowing for both shear and settlement effects.

4.1.2 Ultimate bearing capacity

If a load is increased at the foundation level, shear failure would take place in the
foundation at a load which can be referred to as failure load. The resulting pressure
at the base of the foundation is known as the ultimate bearing capacity of the soil

Three distinct modes of failure have been identified and these are illustrated
in Figure 1.1 in the case of strip footing: -.

a) As the pressure increases on the foundation layer the state of plastic

equilibrium is reached initially in the soil around the edges of the footing and
then spreads downwards and outwards. Ultimately the state of plastic
equilibrium is reached throughout above the failure surfaces. The soil around
the footing heaves on both sides. At the moment of failure one side continues
to settle at a higher rate and the strip footing tilts. This behavior is exhibited
by soils of low compressibility (Figure 1.1a).

b) Local shear failure is characterized by local development of plastic conditions

usually below the foundation. The plastic conditions do not reach the surface
and only slight heaving is expected. This kind of failure is expected with soils
of high compressibility and is associated with large settlements (Figure 1.1b).
These soils include dense and stiff soils.

c) Punching shear occurs when shearing takes place directly below the footing
under compression from load. No heaving is of the ground is expected by the
side of the footing. Large settlements are characteristics of this mode of failure
and are typical of soils of high compressibility and foundations at
considerable depth (Figure 1.1c).

In general, the mode of failure will depend of the compressibility of the soil and the
depth of the foundation.

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417 37

38 Bearing Capacity

a) General shear failure

Pressure

Settlement
c
b) local shear failure b

c) Punching shear failure

Figure 4.1 Modes of failure of foundations

Bearing capacity by use of earth pressure analogy

The earth pressure analogy can be explained by consideration of a strip footing on a

cohesionless soil as shown on Figure 1.3

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417 38

39 Bearing Capacity

p γD

Figure 4.2 Pressure below a strip footing

The vertical pressure is q which is a result of the structure loads. By use of Rankine
active pressure theory, a lateral pressure p holds the soil in equilibrium below the
foundation. For particles just beyond the edge of the foundation the lateral pressure
is more than the vertical pressure γD resulting from the overburden. The vertical
pressure γD is the minor principle stress and p is the principal stress. By use of the
Rankine earth pressure theory Equations 4.1 through 4.3 can be deduced.

𝒑 = 𝒒(𝟏 − 𝒔𝒊𝒏 𝝓)/(𝟏 + 𝒔𝒊𝒏 𝝓) (inside the foundation) Eq 4.1𝒑 =

𝜸𝑫(𝟏 + 𝒔𝒊𝒏 𝝓)/(𝟏 − 𝒔𝒊𝒏 𝝓) (outside the foundation) Eq 4.2

𝒒 = 𝜸𝑫((𝟏 + 𝒔𝒊𝒏 𝝓)/(𝟏 − 𝒔𝒊𝒏 𝝓))𝟐 (ultimate bearing capacity) Eq 4.3

For a cohesionless soil the bearing capacity is dependent on the overburden and
equals to zero for a foundation on the ground surface. Bells development for a c-φ is
given in Equation 4.4

𝒒 = 𝜸𝑫((𝟏 + 𝒔𝒊𝝓)/(𝟏 − 𝒔𝒊𝒏 𝝓))𝟐 + 𝟐𝒄√((𝟏 + 𝒔𝒊𝒏 𝝓)/(𝟏 − 𝒔𝒊𝒏 𝝓)𝟑 +

𝟐𝒄√(𝟏 + 𝒔𝒊𝒏 𝝓)/(𝟏 − 𝒔𝒊𝒏 𝝓) Eq 4.4

For a purely φ =0 soil the ultimate bearing capacity is given by Equation 4.5

𝒒 = 𝜸𝑫 + 𝟒𝒄 Eq 4.5

Bearing capacity by use slip circle analogy

The slip circle analogy can be explained by consideration of a strip footing on a

cohesive soil as shown on Figure 1.3

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417 39

40 Bearing Capacity

q D

O
Radius =B

Half diameter = πB

Figure 4.3 A slip circle analogy of a strip footing

The foundation is assumed to fail by rotation about a slip surface of radius equal to
the width of the base B and at the edge of the foundation O. At ultimate conditions
the disturbing moment (Md) is given by Equation 1.6
𝑩
𝑴𝒅 = 𝒒 ∗ 𝑳 ∗ 𝑩 ∗ 𝟐 Eq 4.6

The resisting moment (Mr) about O is a summation of the resistance due to the
cohesion on the cylindrical surface, on the vertical surface and the weight of the
overburden as given in Equation 1.7

𝜸𝑫𝑳𝑩𝟐
𝑴𝒓 = 𝝅𝒄𝑳𝑩𝟐 + 𝑪𝑫𝑳𝑩 + Eq 4.7
𝟐

At ultimate conditions the disturbing moment is equal to the resisting moment and
the ultimate bearing Equation for a φ = 0 soil is given by Equation 4.8

𝟎.𝟑𝟐𝑫 𝜸𝑫
𝒒 = 𝟔. 𝟐𝟖𝒄(𝟏 + + 𝟎. 𝟏𝟔 ) Eq 4.8
𝑩 𝒄

Plastic theory failure

A suitable failure under a strip footing is shown on Figure 4.4. The footing of width
b and infinite length carries a uniform pressure of magnitude qf. The shear strength
parameters for the soil are c and φ. The unit weight of the soil is assumed to be zero.
At ultimate bearing capacity the soil is pushed downwards into the soil mass
producing a state of plastic equilibrium in the form of an active Rankine zone below
the footing where the angles ABC and BAC are each 45+φ/2. The zone ABC resists
movement and is intact with the base. It suffers no much deformation. The

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417 40

41 Bearing Capacity

downward movement of the wedge ABC forces the adjoining soil to move sideways.
Passive Rankine zones ADE and GBF are developed and angles AEF and BFG are 45-
φ/2. These zones confine the movement of the wedge EDA and BGF. The transition
between the downward movement of the wedge ABC and the lateral movement of
the wedge EDA and BGF takes place through zones of radial shear ACD and BCG.
The surfaces DC and CG are logarithmic spirals. The soil above EDCGF is in a state
of plastic equilibrium while the rest of the soil is in state of elastic equilibrium.

qo A 45+φ/2
qf B

F
E

D C G
45-φ/2

Figure 4.4 Failure under a strip footing

Using plastic theory, the ultimate bearing capacity below a strip footing on a surface
of a weightless soil is given by Equation 4.9. This is for undrained condition where φu
=0

𝒒𝒇 = (𝟐 + 𝝅)𝒄𝒖 = 𝟓. 𝟏𝟒𝒄𝒖 Eq 4.9

In general, the foundation is located at a depth and imposes a surcharge qo = γD. The
weight of the surcharge and the pressure of the foundation produce stresses on the
moving masses of soil at plastic conditions.

The ultimate bearing capacity of the soil under shallow strip footing can be
expressed by the following general equation suggested by Terzaghi.

𝒒𝒇 = 𝟎. 𝟓𝜸𝑩𝑵𝜸 + 𝑪𝑵𝒄 + 𝝀𝑫𝑵𝒒 Eq 4.10

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417 41

42 Bearing Capacity

Nγ, Nc and Nq are bearing capacity factors which depend on the values of φ. Nγ
represents the contribution to the bearing capacity resulting from the self-weight of
the soil. Nc is the contribution due to the constant component of the shear strength
and Nq is the contribution of the surcharge pressure. Values of Nγ, Nc and Nq can be
obtained from Equations 4.11 through 4.13 the values for Nc and Nq were suggested
by Meyerhof (1955) while the values of Nγ, were suggested by Hansen (1970) These
values are plotted in terms of φ in Figure 4.5

𝑵𝒄 = (𝑵𝒒 − 𝟏) 𝒄𝒐𝒕 𝝓 Eq 4.11

𝑵𝒒 = 𝒕𝒂𝒏𝟐 ( 𝟒𝟓 + 𝝓/𝟐)𝒆𝝅 𝒕𝒂𝒏 𝝓 Eq 4.12

𝑵𝜸 = 𝟏. 𝟓(𝑵𝒒 − 𝟏) 𝒕𝒂𝒏 𝝓 Eq 4.13

Nq
100 Nγ
Values of Nc, Nq, Nγ

Nc

10

1
0 10 20 30 40
φ - Degrees

Figure 4.5 Bearing capacity factors for shallow foundations

Bearing capacity for square, round and rectangular foundations

The problem involves extending what is basically a two-dimension problem in a strip

footing to a three-dimension problem in other foundation shapes. The bearing
capacity factors for square and round foundations are shown on Equations 4.14 and
4.15 respectively.

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417 42

43 Bearing Capacity

𝒒 = 𝟎. 𝟒𝜸𝑩𝑵𝜸 + 𝟏. 𝟑𝒄𝑵𝒄 + 𝜸𝑫𝑵𝒒 Eq 4.14

𝒒 = 𝟎. 𝟑𝜸𝑩𝑵𝜸 + 𝟏. 𝟑𝒄𝑵𝒄 + 𝜸𝑫𝑵𝒒 Eq 4.15

The factors for rectangular footing are an interpolation of the square and the strip
footing and are shown on Equation 4.16

𝒒 = 𝟎. 𝟓𝜸𝑩𝑵𝜸 (𝟏 − 𝟎. 𝟐𝑩/𝑳) + 𝒄𝑵𝒄 (𝟏 + 𝟎. 𝟑𝑩/𝑳) + 𝜸𝑫𝑵𝒒 Eq 4.16

It showed be noted that the values of the bearing capacity factors are very sensitive to
the values of shear strength parameters c and φ. Due consideration should therefore
be given to the degree of accuracy of these values. In general, the following
observations have been made

a) In cohesive soils the contribution of cohesion c to the bearing capacity

dominates

b) The depth factor dominates for cohesionless soils

c) The base factor is usually neglected for values of B less than 4 meters

d) A footing at the surface has no bearing capacity if Nγ is neglected

e) The equations are applicable to uniform soils and in the case of stratified soils
an engineering judgment is always required.

Skempton’s values of Nc

Skempton (1951) showed that for a cohesive soil (φ =0) the value of Nc increases with
the value of foundation depth D. He suggested that the values of Nc applicable to
circular, square and strip foundations are given in Figure 4.6. The value of the
rectangular is estimated from the equation
𝐵 𝑍
𝑁𝑐 = 5.14(1 + 0.2 )(1 + 0.2 )
𝐿 𝐵
With a limiting value of
𝐵
𝑁𝑐 = 7.5(1 + 0.2 𝐿 ) which corresponds to a Z/B ratio greater than 2.5

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417 43

44 Bearing Capacity

10

8
Nc

7 Nc (Strip)

6 Nc (Circular
or Square)
5

4
0 1 2 3 4 5
D/B

Figure 4.6 Skempton’s values of Nc for a φ =0 soil

Eccentric and Inclined loading

Eccentric and inclined loadings have an effect of reducing the foundation bearing
capacity. In the case of a foundation with a vertical load such that the eccentricities
are eb and el (Figure 4.7) the effective foundation dimensions are shown as B’ and L’
The resulting load is distributed over the effective foundation dimensions. The values
of B’ and L’ are given in Equations 4.17 and 4.18

𝑩′ = 𝑩 − 𝟐𝒆𝑩 Eq 4.17

𝑳′ = 𝑳 − 𝟐𝒆𝑳 Eq 4.18

In the case of inclined load (Figure 1.8) on a width B and inclination the
effective foundation width is B-2e. In addition, the bearing capacity factors are
multiplied by the inclination factors shown on Equations 1.19 and 1.20

𝒊𝒄 = 𝒊𝒒 = (𝟏 − 𝜶/𝟗𝟎𝒐 )𝟐 Eq 4.19

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417 44

45 Bearing Capacity

𝒊𝜸 = (𝟏 − 𝜶/𝝓)𝟐 Eq 4.20

1) The base of a long retaining wall is 3m wide and is 1m below the ground in
front of the retaining wall. The water table is well below the base level. The
vertical and horizontal components of the base are 282kN/m and 102kN/m
respectively. The eccentricity of the base reaction is 0.36m. The appropriate
shear strength parameters are c’= 0 and φ’ = 35o. The unit weight of soil is
18kN/m3.

Determine the factor of safety against shear failure

1m 282kN/m

102kN/m

1.14m .36m 1.5m

Solution

𝐵 ′ = 𝐵 − 2𝑒 = 3 − 2 ∗ .36 = 2.28𝑚

For φ’ = 35o, Nγ = 41 and Nq = 33

The angle of the inclination to the vertical α = tan -1 (102/282) = 20o hence the
inclination factors according to Meyerhof are

20 2
𝑖𝛾 = (1 − ) = 0.18
35
20 2
𝑖𝑞 = (1 − ) = 0.61
90

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417 45

46 Bearing Capacity

The ultimate bearing capacity is given by

1
𝑞𝑓 = 𝛾𝐵′𝑁𝛾 𝑖𝛾 + 𝛾𝐷𝑁𝑞 𝑖𝑞 = 151 + 362 = 513 𝑘𝑁/𝑚3
2
𝑞𝑛𝑓 = 𝑞𝑓 − 𝛾𝐷 = 513 − 18 ∗ 1 = 495 𝑘𝑁/𝑚3

282
𝑞𝑛𝑒𝑡 = − 18 = 106 𝑘𝑁/𝑚2
2.28
The factor of safety

𝒒𝒏𝒇 𝟒𝟗𝟓
𝒇𝒐𝒔 = = = 𝟒. 𝟕
𝒒𝒏𝒆𝒕 𝟏𝟎𝟔

An alternative approach in the case of inclined loads is to use the empirical formula
shown on Equation 4.21

L’
Y

B B’
eB

X
eL

Figure 4.7 Effective dimensions for pads subjected to eccentric loads

𝑷𝑽 /𝑷𝒂𝒗 + 𝑷𝑯 /𝑷𝒂𝒉 < 𝟏 Eq 4.21

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417 46

47 Bearing Capacity

Where Pv is the vertical component of the inclined load and PH is the horizontal
component of the inclined load. Pav is the allowable vertical load and Pah is the
horizontal load (a fraction of the available passive resistance).

α
P
Pv

PH

Figure 4.8 Foundation with inclined load

4.2.3 The net foundation pressure

The actual pressure on the soil due to the weight of the structure is called the total
foundation pressure q. The net foundation pressure qnet is the increase in the pressure
at the foundation level. This is the total foundation pressure less the effective weight
of the soil permanently removed during excavation and is given in Equation 4.22

𝒒𝒏𝒆𝒕𝒕 = 𝒒 − 𝜸𝑫 Eq 4.22

For a strip footing the net foundation pressure is shown on equation 1.23

𝒒𝒏𝒆𝒕𝒕 = 𝟎. 𝟓𝜸𝑩𝑵𝜸 + 𝒄𝑵𝒄 + 𝜸𝑫(𝑵𝒒 − 𝟏) Eq 4.23

The safe net bearing pressure (qsafe) is the net bearing pressure factored by an
appropriate factor of safety as shown on Equation 1.24

𝒒𝒔𝒂𝒇𝒆 = 𝒒𝒏𝒆𝒕𝒕 /𝑭𝑶𝑺 Eq 4.24

It is usual to use conservative factors of F usually between 3 and 5. Due to

uncertainties in

• the determination of the strength parameters

• and determination of the of the service load,

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417 47

48 Bearing Capacity

for comparison the following factors of safety (Table 4.2) are used in other geotechnical
works

Table 4. 2 Typical factor of safety values for geotechnical works

Failure mode Type of works FOS

Shear Earthworks 1.2-1.6

Shear Retaining walls 1.5-2.0

Shear Sheet piles 1.2-1.5

Seepage Uplift 1.5-2.5

Shear Bearing Capacity 3-5

Effect of ground water

Water table below the foundation level

If the water table is at a depth not less than B below the foundation level the expression
for the net ultimate bearing capacity is given in Equation 1.23 above. However, the
when the water table rises to a depth less than B below the foundation level Equation
4.25 is applicable.

𝒒𝒏𝒆𝒕 = 𝑪𝑵𝒄 + 𝜸𝑫(𝑵𝒒 − 𝟏) + 𝜸𝒔𝒖𝒃 𝑩𝑵𝜸 Eq 4.25

For cohesive soils the value of φ is small and the term 𝛾𝑠𝑢𝑏 𝐵𝑁𝛾 is of little account.
Consequently, the bearing capacity is not affected by the ground water variation
below the foundation level. For sandy soils the term CNc is zero and the term
0.5γsubBNγ is about half 0.5γBNγ. The effect of the groundwater is significant.

Water table above the foundation level

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417 48

49 Bearing Capacity

For this case the net ultimate bearing capacity is given by Equation 1.26. It is seen both
cohesive and cohesionless soils are affected by the water table rising above the
foundation levels

𝒒𝒏𝒆𝒕 = 𝑪𝑵𝒄 + 𝒑′𝒐 (𝑵𝒒 − 𝟏) + 𝜸𝒔𝒖𝒃 𝑩𝑵𝜸 Eq 4.26

Where p’o is the effective overburden above the foundation level.

4.2.4 Allowable bearing pressure

In design, the settlement due to the safe net bearing pressure is computed. If the
resulting settlement is not acceptable then the pressure used in the determination of
the settlement is reduced. At the point when the settlement is acceptable then the
pressure obtained is the allowable bearing capacity of the soil.

In design the ultimate loads are obtained from structural analysis. The
ultimate load is converted into the service load. The gross load is the structural load
above the ground floor plus the overburden. The net load at the foundation level is
the load at the ground floor in addition to the weight of the foundation less any soil
which has been replaced. For practical considerations it is therefore not necessary to
consider the weight of the foundation below the ground level (Figure 4.9)

Gross load =P + overburden

P
Pnet = P + foundation load – replaced soil

Figure 4.9 Net load applied at the foundation level

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417 49

50 Bearing Capacity

4.2.5 Field methods for the determination of bearing capacity of soils

Plate bearing test

The test is particularly suited for the design of foundations or footings where it is
considered that the mass characteristics would differ from the laboratory tests and
where the precise values of settlement are required. The plate load test covers the
determination of vertical deformation and strength characteristics of soil in-situ. From
the data recorded the allowable bearing capacity of the soil is estimated.

In the test an excavation is made to the expected foundation level. The plate
usually 300 to 750 mm square should be rigid and flat. It is loaded by means of
kentledge. The kentledge can be any form of dead load including water, concrete
blocks etc. or tension piles. The loading procedure can be either constant rate of
loading or incremental loading procedure as described below: -

Figure xxx Plate bearing arrangement

Legend: A section, B plan

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417 50

51 Bearing Capacity

Constant rate of penetration

This test is best suited to undrained conditions. In the test the load is applied in a
controlled manner to enable a continuous and uniform rate of penetration. The load
is continued until a penetration of 15% of the plate width is achieved. The ultimate
load is considered to be the load corresponding to the 15% of the plate width
penetration.

Incremental load test

This test is best suited to drained conditions. In the test the load an estimate of the
maximum load is calculated. Five equally spaced increments are then selected. The
load at each increment is recorded together with the corresponding settlement. A load
is maintained until the penetration has ceased or when the primary consolidation is
complete. The ultimate load is considered to be the load corresponding to the 15% of
the plate width penetration as in the case of the constant rate of penetration test.

Plate bearing capacity test results

The plate bearing test results are best reported in graphical way as shown on Figure
4.10. The weak soft clays and loose sands will reach the ultimate bearing capacity in
the region of 100-200 kN/m2 while the stiffer clays and dense sands and gravels will
continue increasing in the bearing pressure with increasing settlement.

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417 51

52 Bearing Capacity

Bearing Pressure (kN/m2)

0 200 400 600 800 1000
0
-2.5
-5
Settlement (mm)

-7.5 Stiff clay, dense

-10 sand or gravel
Soft clay or loose
-12.5 sand
-15

Figure 4.10 Typical plate loading test results

Estimation of allowable bearing pressure from plate bearing test results

The test is reliable only if the stratum being tested is reasonably uniform over the
significant depth of the full-scale foundation. A weak stratum below the significant
depth of the plate but within significant depth of the foundation would have no
influence over the plate test results but will have a significant effect over the
performance of the foundation (Figure 4.11).

b B

1.5b

1.5B

Weak stratum

Figure 4.11 Influence of weak stratum

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417 52

53 Bearing Capacity

Settlement of the stratum increases with increasing loaded area and the main problem
is in the extrapolation of the test results to full scale scenario. Ideally the plate test
should be carried out using plates of different sizes and at different depths. However,
this is usually not economical.

Notwithstanding these shortcomings the following procedure was been

proposed by Terzaghi and Peck (1948) and can be used as a guide to use of plate
bearing test results. The settlement of a square footing kept at a constant pressure
increases as the footing size increases. The relationship is shown on Equation 4.27
relates the settlement of the test plate of 300 mm square and that of a square
foundation of width B.

𝟐𝑩
𝑺 = 𝑺𝟏 ∗ (𝑩+𝟎.𝟑)𝟐 Eq 4.27

Where

S1 = settlement of the loaded area under a 305mm plate for a given pressure
intensity p

S= the settlement of a square foundation of width B in metres under

pressure p

In order to use the plate bearing results the maximum allowable settlement is
determined. A value of 25mm is generally accepted as an allowable settlement. S is
then equated to 25 and a numerical value of B is inserted in the formula to enable the
determination of the S1. From the relationship of P and S1 the value of p corresponding
to the calculated value of S1 is the allowable bearing pressure subject to any
adjustments certain to the ground water conditions.

Standard penetration test

The test covers the determination of the resistance of soils particularly sand and loose
to medium loose gravels at the base of a borehole to the penetration of a split barrel
sampler when dynamically driven in a standard manner. In addition to the
determination of resistance the split sampler is used to obtain disturbed samples for
determination of remolded properties namely particle size analysis and Atterberg
limits when the sample has some degree of plasticity. When used in gravels the
sampler is replaced with a 60o cone which does not sample the soil.

Figure 5.12 shows the main features of standard penetration test equipment.
The drive shoe and the sampler consist of 51 mm external diameter and 35 mm

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417 53

54 Bearing Capacity

internal diameter. It is 450-600 mm long. This is connected to a drive assembly at the

bottom of the boring rods. A pick and release mechanism which ensures a free fall of
a hammer weigh 65 kilograms through of 760 mm + or – 20 mm is used to drive the
sampler or the cone in the case of the gravelly strata

Figure 5.12 Standard penetration equipment.

The procedure requires that the borehole is cleaned carefully to ensure that disturbed
soil at the bottom of the borehole is removed. When boring below the ground water
table it is prudent to maintain the water in the borehole at the same level or higher
than the general ground water. A hydraulic balance is needed to avoid the risk of
boiling of the strata at bottom occasioned by a high hydraulic gradient.

The sampler and the hammer are lowered to the bottom of the borehole. If
after touching the bottom the sampler penetration exceeds 450 mm on its own weight
and that of the hammer, the SPT value also known as N value is recorded as zero.
Otherwise after the initial penetration on own weight the test is driven in two stages
known as seating drive and test drive

The seating drive is the initial 150mm penetration or 25 blows whichever is

reached first. The test drive is the further penetration of 300mm or 50 blows whichever
is reached first. The number of blows for the 300 mm penetration is recorded as the

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417 54

55 Bearing Capacity

SPT value ‘N’. If 300 mm penetration cannot be reached in 50 blows the test drive is
terminated. In this case a hard stratum has been encountered and further driving
results in damage of the split sampler. It is usual to record the blows for every 75 mm
penetration. If the test drive is terminated the penetration corresponding to 25 and 50
blows is recorded.

Interpretation of Standard Penetration Test Results

Pore water pressure

The pore water pressure generated by the hammer during testing affects the value of
N. When the test is carried out below the water table in fine sand or fine silt the
resistance increases as a result increased pore water pressure which does not dissipate
immediately. If the measured N if greater than 15 a correction as shown on Equation
5.28 is performed.

𝑻𝒓𝒖𝒆𝑵 = 𝟏𝟓 + 𝟏/𝟐(𝑵 − 𝟏𝟓) Eq 5.28

The relative density of a soil affects the N values. Terzaghi and Peck (1948) evolved a
qualitative relationship between the relative density and the standard penetration N
values. Gibbs and Hortz put values of relative density. Table 4.3 shows the two
relationships

Table 4.1 Relationship of N values and the relative density of sands

N value Terzaghi and Peck Gibbs and Hortz

0-4 Very loose 0-15%
4-10 Loose 15-35%
10-30 Medium 35-65%
30-50 Dense 65-85%
50+ Very Dense 85-100%

The Effective Stress

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417 55

56 Bearing Capacity

The effective stress at the level of the test also affects the penetration of the SPT split
barrel sampler. This effect can be related to the effective overburden at the level of the
testing. Craig (1986) has summarized the correction of the overburden into Equation
5.29.

𝑵′ = 𝑪𝑵 𝑵 Eq 5.29

Where N’=the corrected value of SPT

N=the measured value of the SPT or the true N in the case of the saturated
loose sands and silts

CN=Overburden factor

The relationship of CN and effective overburden is shown on Figure 4.13

500
Effective Overburden

400
(kN/m2)

300
200
100
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Correction factor CN

Figure 4.13 Estimation of N’ from measured values of N (Craig 1986)

Angle of internal friction and Effective overburden

Standard penetration resistance increases with increasing particle size, increasing

over-consolidation ratio and increasing angle of internal friction of the soil. A
correlation between shear strength parameter and N, and effective overburden is

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417 56

57 Bearing Capacity

shown on Figure 4.14. It provides rough estimate of value of and should not be used
for very shallow foundations.

50

40 φ=25
30 φ=30
SPT - N

φ=35
20
φ=40
10 φ=45
φ=50
0
0 50 100 150 200 250
Effective overburden (kN/m2)

Figure 4.14 Correlation between shear strength parameter φ and N and effective
overburden

Estimation of allowable bearing pressure from standard penetration tests

In 1948 Terzaghi and Peck presented a chart as shown on Figure 4.14 for the estimation
of allowable bearing capacity while limiting the settlement to 25mm and differential
settlement to 75% of the maximum settlement. The procedure involves determination
of the average value of N’ from all the boreholes at the foundation level. The allowable
bearing capacity for the widest foundation is determined and then applied to all the
foundations. Terzaghi and Peck based his chart on foundations on unsaturated soils
when the water table is at lower than 1.0B below the foundation. Thus when the water
table is at 1.0B the reduction of the allowable bearing capacity is zero. The reduction
increases linearly as the water rises. When the water table is at the ground level the
reduction is 50%. Thus the provisional value of allowable bearing capacity obtained
from Figure 4.15 should be reduced by the factor Cw shown on Equation 4.30

𝑪𝒘 = 𝟎. 𝟓 + 𝟎. 𝟓𝑫𝒘 /(𝑫 + 𝑩) Eq 4.30

Where

Dw= depth of the water table below the ground level and D

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417 57

58 Bearing Capacity

D =the depth of the foundation

B = the width of the foundation

Figure 4.15 Terzaghi chart for estimation of bearing capacity from SPT values

Static cone penetration test

The test apparatus consists of a 60o cone as shown on Figure 4.17. The cone is subjected
to continuous penetration in the soil the rate of 15-20 mm per second. The tip has
electrical sensors for continuous recording of the resistance and penetration as shown
on Figure 1. On the more sophisticated cones the friction along the cone can be
measured. In addition, the water pore pressure can also be measured. At every
penetration the resistance is measured as load/cone area and is plotted against
penetration

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417 58

59 Bearing Capacity

Figure 4.16 Static cone penetration apparatus

Resistance = load/end area = qc (kN/m2)

0 200 400 600 800 1000

0
Penetration (mm)

-2.5
-5
-7.5
-10
-12.5
-15

Figure 4.17 Static cone penetration test results

From the data the value of Nγ used in Terzaghi Equation for the Ultimate Bearing
Capacity can be estimated from Equation 4.1. From this Equation the value of internal
angle of friction can be obtained from Figure 4.5. which then enables the determination
Nq and the ultimate bearing capacity. Other empirical values of qa can be obtained
from equations 1.31 through 1.33

𝑵𝜸 = 𝒒𝒄 /𝟖𝟎 Eq 4.31

𝒒𝒂 = 𝒒𝒄 /𝟑𝟎 for B< 1.2m Eq 4.32

𝒒𝒂 = 𝒒𝒄 /𝟓𝟎 ∗ ((𝑩 + 𝟎. 𝟑)/𝑩)𝟐 for B> 1.2m Eq 4.33

Allowable bearing capacity on rock stratum

The bearing capacity of rock is the highest that an engineer can expect to get. In some
cases, the intact rock has unconfined compressive strength larger than the strength of
the concrete which goes to the making of the foundation. In this case it is the structural
design of the materials rather than the strength of the rock control the foundation
design.

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417 59

60 Bearing Capacity

For ordinary structures when site investigation is performed by boring, bedrock

need be proved to a depth of three meters to discount the possibility of isolated
boulders (Craig, 1987). When un-weathered rock has been reached in foundation
construction, the allowable bearing pressure is based on the inherent strength or the
parent rock. The influence of joints, discontinuities and shear zones is to reduce the
allowable bearing capacity. The rock quality designation (RQD) defined as the ratio
of the total length of core of full diameter and length greater than 100mm or greater
to the length of the core run measures the extent of defects and has been used in the
determination of the allowable bearing pressure as shown on Table 1.

Figure xxx rock quality designation definition

Table 1. Allowable bearing capacity RQD

RQD Allowable bearing capacity

(kN/m2)

100 29,300

90 19,500

75 11,700

50 6,800

25 2,900

0 1,000

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417 60

61 Bearing Capacity

Source Peck et al, 1973

Bowles (1982) stated that the settlement is more often the concern than the bearing
capacity. Consequently, most effort should be taken in the determination of modulus
E and Poisson’s ratio η so that an estimate of the settlement can be made.
Alternatively, he suggested that one should use a large factor of safety on the
unconfined compression strength of the intact fragments obtained from the borings.
The factor of safety should depend on the RQD and typically range between 6and 10.

Tomlinson and Boorman (1986) reported the presumed bearing capacity must
not exceed half of the unconfined compression strength of the intact rock fragments.
Ibi (1986) reported presumed allowable bearing capacity values of various rocks
varying from 12,500 kN/m2 for igneous and limestone rocks to as low as 150 kN/m2
for weak un-cemented mudstones.

Rock strength designations based on the unconfined compressive strengths

have been suggested by BS 5930 (Ibi (1986) and the Canadian Geotechnical Society
(Franklin and Dussealt, 1989) are shown on Tables 1.4 and 1.5 respectively.

Table 1. 3 Rock strength designation by BS 5930

Classification Very Weak Mod Mod Strong Very Extremely

Weak Weak Strong strong strong

UCS (kN/m2 Under 2 1.25 to 5 to 12.5 to 50 to 100 to Over 200

x103) 200
6 20 60 200

Source – Tomlinson and Boorman (1986)

Table 1. 4 Rock strength designation by Canadian Geotechnical Association

Classificatio Extremely Very Weak Medium Very Extremely

n Weak Weak Strong strong strong

UCS Under 2 to 6 to 20 to 100 to Over 200

(kN/m2
2 6 20 60 200
x103)

Source: Franklin and Dussealt (1989)

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417 61

62 Bearing Capacity

4.2.6 Presumed bearing capacity of soils and rocks

It is common to use presumed bearing capacity of soils and rocks. The values used
have been derived after many years of testing and performance monitoring of existing
structures. These values are usually conservative do not consider the overburden
above the foundation level. They can be used as preliminary values for the very large
structures where an accurate bearing capacity at the foundation level is needed. In
the case of smaller structures these valued can be considered as final. Table 1.6 shows
the presumed bearing capacity of soils as suggested by BS8004 (1986), while Table 1.7
shows the presumed bearing capacity values used in Kenya. It is to be noted that
difficult soils such as expansive soils, loose sands and silts and made up ground
should be investigated all the time.

Table 1. 5 Presumed allowable bearing vales (BS 8004: 1986)

Category Types of soils and rocks Value Remarks

( kN/m2)

Rocks Strong igneous and gneissic rocks in 10000 The foundations

sound should be taken
to un-weathered
Strong limestone and strong sandstones
4000 rock
Schists and slates
3000
Strong shales, mudstones and siltstones

Non- Dense gravel, or dense sand and gravel >600 The foundation
cohesive width to be not
Medium dense gravel or medium dense
soils less than 1m and
sand and gravel
<200-600 water level not
Loose gravel or loose sand and gravel less than below
<200

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417 62

63 Bearing Capacity

the foundation
Compact sand >300
level
Medium dense sand 100-300

Loose sand <100

Cohesive Very stiff boulder clay and hard clays 300-600 Soils susceptible
soils to long-term
Stiff clays 150-300
consolidation
Firm clays 75-150 and settlement

Soft clays and silts <75

Very soft clays and expansive soils Not applicable

Peat, organic soils, made up ground and fill areas Not applicable

Table 1. 6 Presumed allowable bearing values in Kenya

Soil and rock Value (kN/m2)

Red coffee soil (Red silty clay) 80-150

Medium dense sand 100-300

Loose gravel (Murram) 100-150

Dense gravel 200-400

Compact gravel and weathered 350-600

rock

Un-weathered rock >600

Expansive soils, loose sands and Not Applicable

silts

4.3 Tutorial Examples on Bearing Capacity

1) A footing 2.25 m square is located at a depth of 1.5m. The strength parameters

are c’= 0 and φ’ = 38o. Determine the ultimate bearing capacity

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417 63

64 Bearing Capacity

a) If the water is well below the foundation level.

b) If the water table is at the surface.

Given that the unit weight of sand above the water is 18 kN/m3. The
saturated unit weight of soil is 20kN/m3.

Ans – A 2,408kN/m3 B, 1,365 kN/m3

2) A strip footing is to be designed to carry a load of 800kN/m rum at a depth

of 0.7m in gravelly sand. The appropriate shear strength parameters are c’=
0 and φ’ = 40o. determine the width of a footing if a factor of safety of 3 is
specified assuming that the water level may rise to the foundation level
Above the water table the weight of the gravelly sand is 17 kN/m3. The
saturated unit weight of strata is 20kN/m3.

Ans – 1.55m

3) A footing 2m square is located at a depth of 4 m in stiff clay of saturated

unit weight 21kN/m3. The undrained strength of the clay at a depth of 4m
is cu= 120kN/m3 and φ’ = 0. For a factor of safety of 3 with respect to shear
failure, what load can be carried by the footing

Ans – 1680kN

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417 64

65 Settlement of Soils

CHAPTER FIVE : SETTLEMENT OF SOILS

5.1 Introduction

Almost all structures undergo compressive strains resulting from the settlement of the
foundation and supported structures. Foundation settlements are difficult to estimate
accurately due to variability of the supporting soils vertically and horizontally.
Settlement takes place when the load-imposed causes shear stresses to develop within
the soil mass which are greater than the shearing strength of the soil. The result is
accumulation stresses and that of particles rolling and slipping which results in
permanent soil skeleton change. Settlement also occurs as a result of compressive
stresses and accompanying strains.

Elastic deformation is recoverable after removal of stress is a small

contribution to the total settlement of the foundation. It is often common to use elastic
theory to predict settlements attributed to elastic deformation. This simplifies an
otherwise difficult and complicated problem. The settlement behavior immediately
below a foundation is different from that of the average zone of influence. Further the
mass of soil varies considerably in depth and breadth. This is a result of change in
density and stratification. Settlement is not necessarily an adverse characteristic of the
structure. Uniform settlement does not result in adverse effect on the structural
performance of the structure; it is the differential settlement which results in serious
consequences of the structural performance. Unequal settlement causes the floors and
the walls of buildings to crack badly affecting doors and window frames. In extreme
cases the structures may lean and may be unsightly and may become dangerously
unstable.

The two types of settlement include immediate and consolidation settlements.

The deformation of the elements is shown in Figure 5.1 The two types of settlement
are now discussed below

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

66 Settlement of Soils

Excess pore water Δσ1 Excess pore water Δσ1

Pressure = Δσ1=Δu Pressure = 0

Δσ3 Δσ3 Δσ3 Δσ3

Δσ1 Δσ1

Immediate settlement Consolidation settlement

Figure 5.1 Compression deformations

5.2 Immediate settlement for clays

Semi-infinite layer

Immediate settlements are those which take place soon after application of load.
Usually immediate settlement takes place in the first seven days after loading. The
settlement takes place as a result of expulsion of the air and gases in the soil structure
in partially saturated soils. The soil particles are also reoriented and repacked. With
saturated soils the immediate settlement is a result of vertical soil compression before
there is any change in the volume of the soil.

Rigid foundations

The vertical settlement can be estimated from Equation 5.1 which is based on elastic
theory and assumes that the supporting soil is, homogenous, isotropic, and with linear
– stress relationship.
𝒒𝑩
𝒔𝒊 = (𝟏 − 𝝂𝟐 )𝑰𝒔 Equation 5.1
𝑬

Where

si = settlement of a rectangular or circular foundation

q = the uniform pressure on the foundation

Is = An influence factor depending on the shape of the loaded area.

E = the modulus of elasticity of the supporting soil

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

67 Settlement of Soils

υ = the poisons ratio

B = the lesser dimension of a rectangular shaped foundation of dimensions BxL

or the diameter of a circular foundation

The equation shows that the vertical settlement is uniform. However, the settlement
is of the form of Figure 5.2. If the loaded area was rigid the vertical displacement
would be nearly the same as those calculated. However, the pressure distribution of
pressure and the resulting settlement would be as shown on Figure 5.2b. Values of
influence factors for rectangular and circular shapes are shown on
Table 5.1 for the center and edge corner of a rectangle. In the case of circular
foundation, the corner represents the edge of the circular foundation. Typical values
of Poisson’s ratio are shown on Table 5.2.

s1 s1
a- Flexible area b - Rigid area

Figure 5.2 Contact pressure and settlements under flexible and rigid areas

Table 5.1 Influence factors for vertical displacement under a flexible area carrying
a uniform pressure

Shape of area Is - Centre Is - corner Is - Average

Square 1.12 0.56 0.95
Rectangle L/B=2 1.52 0.76 1.30
Rectangle L/B=5 2.10 1.05 1.83
Circle 1.00 0.64 0.85

Table 5.2 Typical values of Poisson’s ratio

Type of soil Poisson’s ratio υ

Saturated clay 0.4-0.5

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

68 Settlement of Soils

Unsaturated clay 0.1-0.3

Sandy clay 0.2-0.3

The value of settlement being calculated is immediate settlement. The value of the
modulus should therefore be the undrained modulus Eu. The main difficulty in the
determination of the settlement is the accurate determination of Eu. The value of Eu is
usually obtained from the results of consolidated undrained triaxial test carried on a
representative sample. The sample is consolidated under a cell pressure
approximately equal to the overburden pressure at the level of the foundation. The
soil is then sheared under undrained conditions to obtain the plot of deviator stress
against the strain. The curve is not a straight line and is usually drawn between zero
and the deviator stress that will be expected in the field (Figure 5.3). In deep layers
the difficulty arises as to which depth is to be taken as average. Typical values of Eu
are shown on Table 5.3
Deviator stress (σ 1-σ3)

Eu =(σ1-σ3)/ε

Strain (ε)

Figure 5.3 Young’s modulus determination from triaxial test results

Table 5.3 Typical range of Modulus of Elasticity (Eu)

Type of soil Eu Range (kN/m2)

Very soft clay 0.35-2.8x103

Soft clay 1.75-4.2x103

Medium clay 4.2-8.4x103

Hard clay 7-17.5x103

Sandy clay 28-42x103

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

69 Settlement of Soils

Flexible foundations

The formula for immediate settlement was given by Terzaghi (1943). The formula is
similar to the previous one for rigid foundations and is given below in Equation 7.2.
The immediate settlement given is at corners of a rectangular footing. By
superposition the immediate settlement at any point outside and inside of a
rectangular footing may be estimated. Values of Np are given on Table
𝒑𝑩(𝟏−𝝊𝟐 )
𝒔𝒊 = 𝑵𝒑 7. 1
𝑬

Table 5.4 – Values of Np

L/B Np L/B Np

1 0.56 4 0.96

2 0.76 5 1

3 0.88

Immediate settlement for a thin clay layer

In most cases the soil deposits are not semi-infinite but rather they have a limited
thickness underlain by a hard stratum. For cases where the depth of the clay layer is
greater than 4.0B below the footing it is reasonable to assume that the layer is semi-
infinite. For finite layers Janbu et al (1956) gave Equation 5.2 for estimation of average
vertical displacement under a flexible area carrying a uniform pressure q. The
Equation assumes that the Poisson’s ratio for the soil is 0.5
𝒒𝑩
𝒔𝒊 = 𝝁𝒐 𝝁𝟏 Equation 5.2
𝑬

Where

μo and μ1 are coefficients obtained from Figure 5.4

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

70 Settlement of Soils

Figure 5.4 Coefficients for vertical displacement (after Janbu et al (1956)

Example 5. 1

A foundation 4mx2m carrying a uniform pressure of 200kN/m2, is located at a depth

of 1m in a layer of clay 5m thick for which the value of Eu is 40x103 kN/m2. The layer
is underlain by a second layer 8m thick for which the value of Eu is 75x103.kN/m2 A
hard stratum lies below the second layer. Determine the average immediate
settlement under the foundation

With reference to Figure 5.4

D/B = 1/2 = 0.5 L/B = 4/2 = 2

From Figure 2.4 – μo = 0.90

1) Considering the upper clay layer

H/B = 4/2 = 2 and L/B = 4/2

Therefore μ1 = 0.70

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

71 Settlement of Soils

From Equation 2.2 si1 = 0.9x0.7x200x2/40 = 6.3mm

2) Considering the two layers combined with Eu = 75x103.kN/m2

H/B = 12/2 = 6 and L/B = 4/2

Therefore μ1 = 0.90

From Equation 2.2 si2 = 0.9x0.9x200x2/75 = 4.32mm

3) Considering the upper layer with Eu = 75x103.kN/m2

H/B = 4/2 = 2 and L/B = 4/2 = 2

Therefore μ1 = 0.70

From Equation 2.2 si3 = 0.9x0.7x200x2/75 = 3.36mm

By the principle of superposition, the settlement of the foundation due to the two
layers is given by

si = si1 + si2 - si3 = 6.30+4.32-3.36 = 7.26mm

5.3 Immediate settlement cohesionless soils

De Beer and Marens’ Method

Due to the high permeability the primary and secondary settlements occur together
and are usually considered as immediate settlements. It is to be noted that the chances
of a bearing capacity failure on purely cohesionless soils are low. For cohesionless
soils it is the settlement criteria which are considered in design. It is usual to allow a
settlement of 25mm in the foundation design and construction. The pressure which
results in an allowable pressure of 25mm is described as the allowable pressure.

The actual settlement of the foundation is unknown when the applied pressure
is not equal to the allowable pressure. It is common to use in-situ tests to determine
the settlement of the foundations on cohesionless soils. In-situ Dutch penetration tests
are commonly used. A correlation of the Dutch cone test results can be used to
estimate the settlement when a standard penetration test has been used in the
investigation

The Dutch cone penetration test is carried out and the results are plotted as
shown on Figure 5.5. The test usually returns a value of the resistance of the soil to
penetration of the cone along the depth. Cr may also be gotten from in-situ standard
penetration results from a relationship of Cr and N as given by Equation 5.2 where the
Dutch cone penetration test has not been used in the testing.

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

72 Settlement of Soils

𝑪𝒓 = 𝟒𝟎𝟎𝑵 Equation 5.3

Where N = standard penetration resistance

Cr (kN/m2)

Cr = cone resistance
Depth
(m)

Figure 5.5 Dutch cone test results

From test results the soil beneath can be divided into a number of suitable layers with
approximately the same order of Cr. The soil considered as being affected by the
foundation lie between 2.0B and 4.0B. The method proposes the use of a constant
compressibility value Cs as proposed by Meyerhof (1956) and given in Equation 2.5
𝑪
𝑪𝒔 = 𝟏. 𝟗 𝒑 𝒓 2. 1
𝒐𝟏

Where

Cs = compressibility value

Cr. = static cone resistance of the layer

p01 = effective overburden pressure at the point the cone is tested

The total immediate settlement is given by Equation 2.6

𝑯 𝒑𝒐𝟐 +𝜟𝝈𝒛
𝒔𝒊 = 𝑪 𝒍𝒏 2. 2
𝒔 𝒑𝒐𝟐

Where

Δσz = vertical stress increase at the centre of the foundation layer

H = the thickness of the layer

po2 = effective overburden pressure at the centre of the layer before load
application or excavation (for heave)

The plate test method

The results from plate test method may be used to predict the average settlement of a
foundation on a cohesionless soil. The test predicts reasonably accurate values when

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

73 Settlement of Soils

the soil being tested is reasonably homogenous for some depth. The settlement under
the footing is obtained from Equation 2.7
𝟐𝑩
𝒔 = 𝒔𝟏 (𝑩+𝑩 )𝟐 2. 3
𝟏

Where

s = the average settlement (mm) of the foundation for a certain value of the bearing
pressure.

s1 = the settlement (mm) of the plate under test under the same pressure in millimeters.

B1= the width or diameter (m) of test plate.

B = the width or diameter (m) of the proposed foundation.

The actual level of the ground water table in required. In the event the test is carried
under dry conditions and then the water table rises to the pressure bulb horizons the
actual settlement could double from the predicted values.

Example 5. 2

A reinforced concrete foundation of dimensions 20mx40m exerts a uniform pressure

of 200kN/m2 on a semi-infinite soil layer (E = 50MN/m2). Determine the value of
immediate settlement under the foundation. Assume that the poisons ratio is 0.5.

Solution

L/B =40/20 = 2

Therefore, Is = 1.0 (Smith, 1998) or Is = 1.3 (Craig, 1986)

𝑝𝐵(1−𝜐2 ) 200∗20
𝑠𝑖 = 𝐼𝑠 = 𝑥0.75 = 0.06m =60mm
𝐸 50000

Example 5. 3

The plan of a proposed spoil heap is shown below. The tip will be about 23m high
and will sit on a thick soft clay deposit (E=15MN/m2). Assume that the pressure
exerted by the waste is 300kN/m2. Estimate the immediate settlement under the point
A at the surface of the soil.

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

74 Settlement of Soils

50m

1
150m 30m

A 2 3
50m

Solution

Split the area into three rectangles (1, 2 and 3)

From Table 3.4

Rectangle 1 100x50m L/B = 2.0, Np =0.76

Rectangle 2 50x50m L/B = 1.0, Np =0.56

Rectangle 3 50x30m L/B = 1.67, Np =0.64

𝑝(1 − 𝜐 2 )
𝑠𝑖 = (𝑁𝑝 1 𝐵1 + 𝑁𝑝2 𝐵2 + 𝑁𝑝3 𝐵3
𝐸
300𝑥0.75
𝑠𝑖 = (.76𝑥50 + 0.56𝑥50 + 0.64𝑥30 = 1.27𝑚
15000
Example 5. 4

A foundation 1.5m square is to carry 300kN/m2 at a depth of 0.75m in a deep granular

soil deposit. The soil is saturated and has a bulk density of 20kN/m2. The water table
is at a depth of 1.5m. Determine the settlement of the foundation if the standard
penetration test was carried out on the strata and gave the N values given on Figure
5.4

Aide memoir

Use Fadum’s charts (Figure 5.6) to obtain the vertical pressure increments at
the centre of the layers.

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

75 Settlement of Soils

Figure 5.6 Fadums chart for estimation of vertical pressure under a corner of a
rectangular area carrying a uniform pressure (After Craig 1987)

Solution

Layer Δz Cr po1 at the centre of layer Cs=1.9Cr/po1

1 1 400*12=4800 20*1.25=25 365

2 1 400*16=6400 20*2.25-9.81*.75=37.6 323

3 1.5 400*24=9600 20*3.5-9.81*2=50.4 362

4 1.5 9600 20*5-9.81*3.5=65.7 277

q= 300-.75*20 = 285kN/m2

Layer B/z=L/z =m =n Iz Δσz=4Izp H/Cs 𝒑𝒐 𝟐 + 𝜟𝝈𝒛 𝑯

𝒔𝒊 = 𝒍𝒏 ∗
𝒑𝒐 𝟐 𝑪𝒔

1 0.75/0.5=1.5 0.213 243 1/365 6.9*10-3

2 0.75/1.5=0.5 0.088 100 1/323 4.0*10-3

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

76 Settlement of Soils

Layer B/z=L/z =m =n Iz Δσz=4Izp H/Cs 𝒑𝒐 𝟐 + 𝜟𝝈𝒛 𝑯

𝒔𝒊 = 𝒍𝒏 ∗
𝒑𝒐 𝟐 𝑪𝒔

3 0.75/2.75=0.27 0.03 34 1.5/362 2.11*10-3

4 0.75/4.25=0.18 0.015 17 1.5/277 1.24*10-3

Total settlement 13.845mm

0.75m
1.75m N=12 1m

1m N=16 1m

1.5m
N=24

1.5m

Figure 5.7 Example 5.4

5.4 Consolidation settlement for cohesive soils

5.4.1 Introduction

Soils consists of solid grains which enclose voids which may be filled with air, liquid
or a combination of both air and liquid. The vertical compression of the soil is
therefore made up of the following components.

a) Compression of the solid matter – under usual loadings, the solid matter is
relatively incompressible and account for very little compression

b) Compression of the fluid - this may be considerable when the pores contain
air. For fully saturated soils this is negligible.

c) Reduction of pore space by expulsion of pore fluid. – this provides the bulk
of consolidation settlement

Consolidation is the gradual reduction in volume of a fully saturated soil of low

permeability due to drainage of some pore water. The process continues until the
excess pore pressure set by the increase in the total stress has completely dissipated.
After the excess pore water has been dissipated further settlement is due to

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

77 Settlement of Soils

realignment of the soil grains under load and is considered as secondary

consolidation.

Consolidation settlement is considered as the vertical displacement of the

surface corresponding to the volume change during the consolidation process. The
consolidation of a clay layer supporting a foundation whose lateral dimensions are
much larger than the layer thickness are essentially one dimensional except at the
edges. Consolidation will therefore occur due to a rise in the pore water pressure
occasioned by construction of structure over saturated clay or if the water table is
lowered permanently. Heaving which is the reverse of the consolidation occurs when
excavation is done in a saturated clay.

The process of consolidation is generally monitored in structures by installing

piezometers which can record the change in the pore water pressure with time. The
actual consolidation can be monitored by taking levels of the structure and recording
the levels of particular points on the structure with reference to a benchmark whose
level is not affected by the consolidating soil.

5.4.2 The odometer test

General

To simulate field consolidation, the odometer test is usually performed. The test
apparatus is also used for estimation of the swell pressure of an expansive soil. The
test apparatus is shown on Figure 5.1. The test specimen is held inside a metal ring
and lies between two porous stones. The porous stones allow the escape of air and
water from the sample without the loss of the sample fines. The upper porous stone
can move inside the ring with a small clearance. It is fitted with a loading cap through
which pressure can be applied. The whole assembly sits in an open cell of water and
the sample has access to the water through the porous stones. The confining ring
imposes a condition of zero lateral strain and the ratio of lateral pressure to the vertical
pressure is known as Ko and is referred to as the coefficient of earth pressure at rest.
More elaborate explanation of the coefficient of earth pressure at rest is covered in the
chapter on lateral pressure.

The laboratory test produces a one-dimensional compression as the lateral

confinement by the test ring ensures no lateral strain. The initial excess pore water
pressure induced in the sample is equal to the applied principal stress. The
consolidation takes place as the soil is loaded by maintained loads over the test
periods.

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

78 Settlement of Soils

Figure 5.8 Odometer test apparatus and specimen

Procedure

To obtain reasonably correct idea of the in-situ soil consolidation it is necessary to test
undisturbed soil sample obtained from the field and carefully trimmed to fit in the test
apparatus. After placing the sample in the ring, it is loaded with a sequence of
pressure. Each pressure is doubled from the previous one. Each pressure is
maintained for 24 hours while compression readings are being taken at suitable
intervals. The compression of the sample should then have ceased. At this stage all
the excess pore water pressure has dissipated and the pressure being applied is
effective pressure. The loading sequence is usually selected from the following range
of pressures

12.5, 25, 50, 100, 200, 400, 800, 1600, 3200 kN/m2

Initial pressure applied to the sample

The initial pressure to be applied is dependent on the type of soil and should be large
enough to counterbalance the swelling of the sample. The following working guide
is normally used as the criterion for the selection of the initial pressure.

Stiff soils and firm soils: - The initial pressure is the equivalent of the estimated
effective overburden pressure. This brings the sample to the field conditions at the
beginning of the testing.

Soft soils: - The initial pressure shall be considerably less than the effective
overburden pressure. A pressure as low as 10 kN/m2 may be necessary for very
sensitive soils. This is principally because an attempt to bring the soil to its original
state may result in consolidation parameters being missed out in the experiment.

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

79 Settlement of Soils

Expansive soils: - If after the soil has been allowed to take in moisture it swells after
the initial pressure has been applied the next higher value of pressure shall be applied.
This is the case of an expansive clay. If the swelling continues the pressure shall be
further increased and the readings of the compression gauge shall be taken at suitable
intervals until the swelling ceases. The pressure which maintains the sample at its
original height is the soil pressure.

Collapsible soils: - In some form of collapsible soils the specimen continues to

consolidate after addition of water to the odometer cell. Yet in some others they
consolidate on the application of initial pressure after recoding some swelling. In
these two scenarios readings of the compression gauge shall be taken at suitable
intervals as the pressure is maintained at the same level.

Test loading

The test shall cover at least four stages of testing. The greatest pressure on the
specimen should be greater than effective pressure which will occur in-situ due to the
overburden and the proposed construction. The test results can be as shown on Figure
5.9

Time
p1
Sample P2
compression P3
P4

Figure 5.9 Test results of odometer

Compressibility characteristics

The compressibility characteristics are best illustrated by a plot of the compression of

the specimen as ordinate on a linear scale and the corresponding pressure p in kN/m2
as the graph abscissa on a logarithmic scale. For every load increment there is one
final void ratio. From the whole series of loads in one experiment a curve between
pressure and the void ratio can be plotted as shown on Figure 5.10.

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

80 Settlement of Soils

e0 0.9

e1 0.8
e2

e 0.7

0.6
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
p1 p2
Pressure (kN/m2)

Figure 5.10 Typical e-p curve

If the sample is recompressed after the initial cycle of compression and expansion
the e-p curve for the whole operation is similar to curves shown Figure 5.11. The
recompression curve is flatter than the original compression curve. The primary
compression is thus made up of i) a reversible part and ii) an irreversible part.

Once the consolidation pressure is taken beyond the original consolidation pressure
(the pre-consolidation pressure) the e-p curve follows the trend of the original
compression curve.

0.9
Recompression
0.8

e 0.7
Expansion

0.6
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
2
Pressure (kN/m )

Figure 5.11 Effect of expansion

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

81 Settlement of Soils

The compression may be indicated as the actual thickness of the soil or as the strain
by potting the percentage reduction in thickness or void ratio. It is normal to use the
void ratio on the ordinate and the pressure as the abscissa.

The slope of the e-p curve is given by Equation 5.4. It decreases with increasing
pressure. However, settlement problems are concerned with a range of pressure
(initial pressure and final pressure). Over this range the slope can be taken as constant
by assuming a straight-line curve between the range of pressures.
𝒆 −𝒆 𝜟𝒆
𝒂 = 𝒑𝟏 −𝒑𝟐 = 𝜟𝒑 Equation 5.4
𝟐 𝟏

The compressibility characteristics can be explained and derived using the phase
diagram shown on Figure 5.12. If the mass of soil at the beginning of the test has a
volume V1 and the mass at the end is V2 the volumetric change is defined as volume
change per unit of the original volume. It is given by Equation 5.4. derived by
consideration of the phase diagram as follows

ΔV Δe
ΔH
e1 e2

Water = Water Vs=1

V1 V2 H1 H2 1
vs Hs
Solids Solids

Figure 5.12 Phase diagram

𝑽𝟏 − 𝑽𝟐 𝜟𝑽 𝑯𝟏 − 𝑯𝟐 𝜟𝑯
𝑽𝒐𝒍𝒖𝒎𝒆𝒏𝒕𝒓𝒊𝒄 𝑪𝒉𝒂𝒏𝒈𝒆 = = = =
𝑽𝟏 𝑽 𝑯𝟏 𝑯
𝒆𝟏 −𝒆𝟐 𝜟𝒆 (𝒑𝟐 −𝒑𝟏 )
= = 𝟏+𝒆 =𝒂 Equation 5.5
𝟏+𝒆𝟏 𝟏+𝒆𝟏

The coefficient of volume compressibility mv is defined as the compression of the

soil, per unit of the original thickness due to a unit increase of effective pressure. It
is the ratio of the volumetric change to the unit of pressure increase.
𝑣𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑚𝑒𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑐 𝑐ℎ𝑎𝑛𝑔𝑒
𝑚𝑣 =
𝑢𝑛𝑖𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑢𝑟𝑒 𝑖𝑛𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑠𝑒

This can be represented in Equation 5.6. It has the units of the inverse of pressure
(m2/MN). The volume change can be expressed either in terms of the change in
void ratio or in the change in specimen thickness.

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

82 Settlement of Soils

𝒂(𝒑𝟐 −𝒑𝟏 ) 𝒂
𝒎𝒗 = (𝟏+𝒆 = 𝟏+𝒆
𝟏 )(𝒑𝟐 −𝒑𝟏 ) 𝟏
𝒆𝟏 − 𝒆 𝟐 𝜟𝒆
= =
(𝟏 + 𝒆𝟏 )(𝒑𝟐 − 𝒑𝟏 ) (𝟏 + 𝒆𝟏 )𝜟𝒑
𝜟𝑯 𝜟𝑯
= 𝑯(𝒑 = Equation 5.6
𝟐 −𝒑𝟏 ) 𝑯𝜟𝒑

The value of is not constant but depends on the stress range over which it is calculated.
For most practical problems mv can be calculated over an increase of 100kN/m2 over
the effective present overburden pressure shows typical values of mv when the stress
range is taken as 100kN/m2

Table 2.2 Typical values of mv

Type of soil mv (m2/MN)

Peat 10.0-2.0

Plastic clay 2.0-0.25

Stiff clay 0.25-0.125

Hard clay (boulder clay) 0.125-0.0625

Calculation of settlement

Once the coefficient of volume change has been determined the settlement of the strata
is obtained from Equation 5.7. The Equation allows the summation of the layer
settlements occasioned by the increase in pressure at the various depths. Accordingly,
the values of mv change with depth depending on the anticipated increase in pressure
due to the structure load.

𝑻𝒐𝒕𝒂𝒍 𝑺𝒆𝒕𝒕𝒍𝒆𝒎𝒆𝒏𝒕 = 𝝆𝒄 = ∑𝑯
𝟎 𝒎𝒗 ∗ 𝒅𝒑 ∗ 𝑯 Equation 5.7

The compression index (Cc) is the slope of the linear portion of the e-log pressure plot
and is dimensionless. For any two linear portion of the plot the value of Cc can be
obtained from Equation 5.8. The liquid limit of a soil is related to its compression
index. Skempton suggested that Equation 5.9 could be used for the estimation of the
value of Cc. It is seen that with value of LL known the value of Cc can be estimated.
Equation 5.8 can then be reorganized to give a predicated value of change in the void
ratio over a range of effective pressure once the fundamental value of liquid limit is
determined in the laboratory.
𝒆𝟏 −𝒆𝟐
𝑪𝒄 = 𝒑 Equation 5.8
𝒍𝒐𝒈 𝟐
𝒑𝟏

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

83 Settlement of Soils

𝑪𝒄 = 𝟎. 𝟎𝟎𝟗(𝑳𝑳 − 𝟏𝟎) Equation 5.9

Consolidation curves

A clay stratum is normally formed by the process of sedimentation of clay particles.

In the course of time more overburden is gradually deposited over the clay strata.
Normally consolidated clay is one where the present overburden is not more what has
been the maximum pressure over the years. Over-consolidated clay is one where the
present overburden on the clay is less than the maximum pressure that has over the
years consolidated the clay. The extra overburden having been eroded by the various
forces viz water and ice movements.

Virgin consolidation curve is the e-p curve corresponding to the natural process of
consolidation. This takes place as the clay is loaded by deposits on top of the clay
subsequent to its formation. The drop in void ratio with increasing pressure is
approximately logarithmic and when plotted on a semi-log scale the graph is a straight
line as shown on Figure 5.12. The straight line is of a form given in Equation 5.10
derived from Equation 5.8. The virgin consolidation curve is essentially the same as
that of normally consolidated clay. Hence in terms of Cc and e1 and p1 and p2 obtained
from the odometer test, the expression can be written as shown on Equation 5.11
e

a) e-p on normal plot

e1
e

e2

p1 P2
Log P

b) e-p on semi plot

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

84 Settlement of Soils

Figure 5.13 Natural consolidation

𝐩𝟎 +𝐝𝐩
𝒆 = 𝒆𝟎 − 𝐂𝐜 𝐥𝐨𝐠 𝟏𝟎 Equation 5.10
𝐩𝟎

Where Cc is the compression index of the clay.

e is the present void ratio

eo is the original void ratio before the more load is applied

po is the original overburden pressure

dp is the increase in the pressure on the clay.

𝒑
𝒆𝟐 = 𝒆𝟏 − 𝑪𝒄 𝒍𝒐𝒈𝟏𝟎 𝒑𝟐 Equation 5.11
𝟏

Pre-consolidation pressure for over-consolidated clay

Casagrande construction

Once e-log p curve has been drawn from the odometer test results, Casagrande
proposed an empirical construction to obtain the maximum effective vertical stress
that has acted on the clay in the past. This pressure is referred to as the pre-
consolidation pressure. Due to the over consolidation the resulting compression is
less than that of normally consolidated clay for corresponding range of pressure. The
semi-log plot is no longer straight and the compression index is no longer a constant.
To obtain the pre-consolidation pressure the following steps are undertaken Figure
5.14

• Determine the point of maximum curvature visually - A

• Draw a horizontal line AB and the tangent AC originating at A

• Bisect the angle BAC to give the line AD

• Locate the straight portion of the curve and project this straight portion to cut
line AD at F.

• The point F gives the pre-consolidation pressure P

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

85 Settlement of Soils

B
F
A
D
C
e

E
p’
Log p

Figure 5.14 Determination of pre-consolidation pressure (Casagrande)

Schmertman construction for the in-situ e-logp’ curve

Due to effects of sampling and preparation of the sample in the odometer test, the
sample inevitably disturbed. This disturbance results in slight decrease in the slope
of the virgin curve. The slope of curve obtained in the laboratory is subsequently less
than that of the virgin curve. Schmertmann suggested that the virgin curve intersects
with the laboratory curve at a void ratio equal to 0.42e0 where e0 is the sample in-situ
void ratio. The in-situ virgin curve can be taken as EF (Figure 5.15). The coordinates
of E are Casagrande p’ and e0. F is the point on the laboratory curve at a void ratio of
0.42e0

For over-consolidated clays the in-situ condition is represented by the point G

having the coordinates of p’o and eo. p’o is the effective present effective overburden
pressure. The in-situ recompression curve can be approximated to line GH parallel to
the laboratory recompression curve

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

 86 Settlement of Soils
Current overburden pressure
e0 G E

In-situ recompression curve

Laboratory recompression curve

e

0.42e0 F’
p’0 p’

Log p

Figure 5.15 In-situ e log p’ curve

Example 5.1

The following compression readings were obtained in an odometer test on a specimen

of a saturated clay. (Gs = 2.73).

Pressure (kN/m2) 0 54 107 214 429 858 1716 3432 0

Dial gauge after 24h 5 4.747 4.493 4.108 3.449 2.608 1.676 0.737 1.480
(mm)

The initial thickness was 19.0mm and at the end of the test the water content was
19.8%.

i) Plot the e-log p’ curve and determine the pre-consolidation pressure.

ii) Determine the values of mv for the stress increments (100-200 kN/m2 and
1000-1500 kN/m2).

iii) Determine the value of Cc for the for the two stress increments.

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

87 Settlement of Soils

Solution

Void ratio at the end of the test = e1 = wGs = 0.198*2.73=0.541

Void ratio at the start of the test = e0 =e1+Δe

Now,
𝛥𝑒 𝛥𝐻 𝛥𝑒 1 + 𝑒0 1 + 𝑒 + 𝛥𝑒
= 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑒 = =
1 + 𝑒0 𝐻0 𝛥𝐻 𝐻0 𝐻0
𝛥𝑒 1 + .541 + 𝛥𝑒
⥂ = 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑒 𝛥𝑒 = 0.351
5 − 1.480 19

𝑒0 = 0.541 + 0.350 = 0.891

The relationship between Δe and ΔH is given by

𝛥𝑒 1 + 𝑒0 1.891
= =
𝛥𝐻 𝐻0 19

∴ 𝛥𝑒 = 0.0996𝛥𝐻

The relationship can be used in the determination of void ratio at the end each
pressure increment (Table 2. ) Using Casagrande’s construction the pre-consolidation
pressure is estimated at 325 kN/m2. The e log p’ curve is shown on Figure 5.16

Table 2. 3 Example 5.1

Pressure (kN/m2) ΔH Δe=0.0096*ΔH e=e0+Δe

0 0.000 0.000 0.891

54 0.253 0.025 0.866

107 0.507 0.050 0.841

214 0.892 0.089 0.802

429 1.551 0.154 0.737

858 2.392 0.238 0.653

1716 3.324 0.331 0.560

3432 4.263 0.425 0.466

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

88 Settlement of Soils

Pressure (kN/m2) ΔH Δe=0.0096*ΔH e=e0+Δe

0 3.520 0.351 0.540

0.90

0.80

0.70
e

0.60

0.50

0.40
10 100 1000 10000
p'

Figure 5.16 e log p’

1 𝑒0 − 𝑒1
𝑚𝑣 = ∗
1 + 𝑒0 𝑝1 − 𝑝0

For p0’ = 100kN/m2 and p1’ = 200kN/m2

e0 = 0.845 and e1 = 0.808

mv =1/7.845*0.037/100=2x10-4m2/kN=0.20m2/MN

For p0’ = 1000 kN/m2 and p1’ = 1500 kN/m2

e0 = 0.632 and e1 = 0.577

mv = 0.067m2/MN
0.632 − 0.577 0.055
𝐶𝑐 = = = 0.31
1500 0.176
𝑙𝑜𝑔 1000

5.4.3 Settlement by Skempton and Bjerrum Method

Predictions of consolidation using one dimensional method are based on odometer

test which do not allow lateral strain. In this case the initial excess pore water pressure
is equal to the increase in the vertical stress. In practice where the load is not wide
enough and the clay is not thin, lateral strain does take place and the Terzaghi’s
consolidation has to be modified accordingly. In this case there will be immediate

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

89 Settlement of Soils

settlement under undrained conditions and followed by consolidation under drained

conditions. The total settlement is given by

s = si + sc

Where

s is the total settlement

si is the immediate settlement estimated from results of elastic theory as covered at the
beginning of this chapter section 5.2.

sc is the consolidation settlement to be dealt with here

To obtain the consolidation settlement the initial excess water pressure for saturated
clay depends on the pore pressure parameter A given in Equation 5.12

𝜟𝒖𝒊 = 𝜟𝝈𝟑 + 𝑨(𝜟𝝈𝟏 − 𝜟𝝈𝟑 )

𝜟𝝈𝟑
= 𝜟𝝈𝟏 [𝑨 + 𝜟𝝈 (𝟏 − 𝑨)] Equation 5.12
𝟏

The value of A is determined experimentally in a triaxial cell under undrained

conditions. The pressure on the specimen as it is loaded is shown on Figure 5.17. In
the test the value of Δu1 and Δσ1 are obtained when the minor principal stress does
not change (Δσ3=0). In the calculation of the settlement the odometer test results are
used but the excess pore water pressure given in Equation 5.12 is used.

σ3
σ1 +σ3+Δσ3

σ3 σ3+Δσ3 σ3+Δσ3
ui σ3 ui +Δui

σ1 +σ3+Δσ3
σ3
Before testing – sample with After testing – Application
an all-round pressure σ3 of principal stress σ1

Figure 5.17 Triaxial sample variation in pressure during testing.

The one-dimensional settlement using the odometer test is given by Equation 5.13

𝒔𝒐𝒆𝒅 = ∑𝑯
𝟎 𝒎𝒗 ∗ 𝜟𝝈𝟏 ∗ 𝒅𝒛 Equation 5.13

Where H is the thickness of the clay layer

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

90 Settlement of Soils

soed is the consolidation of the various layers in the clay layer based on the
odometer test only

Skempton and Bjerrum (1957) introduced a coefficient μ such that the consolidation
settlement is given by Equation 5.14.

𝒔𝒄 = 𝝁𝒔𝒐𝒆𝒅 Equation 5.14

The use of value of A in the determination of pore water pressure is applicable to

conditions of axial symmetry. This applies to settlement of a circular footing at its
centre. However, the value of A so obtained may be used for the settlement of a square
foundation using a circular footing of same area. In the case of strip footing the value
of A changes and Equation 5.15 may be used for its estimation. Alternatively, values
of μ for strip and circular footings are shown on Error! Reference source not found..
Typical values of μ are shown on able 2. 4

𝑨𝒔 = 𝟎. 𝟖𝟔𝟔𝟔𝑨 + 𝟎. 𝟐𝟏𝟏 Equation 5.15

Table 2. 4 Typical values of μ

Soft, sensitive clays 0.1- 1.2

Normally consolidated clays 0.6 - 1

Lightly over-consolidated clays 0.4-0.7

Heavily over-consolidated clays 0.25-0.4

Figure 5.18 Settlement coefficient μ for various values of A for strip and circular
footings

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

91 Settlement of Soils

Example 5.5

A 6metre square footing carrying a net pressure of 160 kN/m2 is located at depth of
2m in a deposit of stiff clay 17m thick as shown on Figure 5.19. An incompressible
stratum lies below the stiff clay. The value of coefficient of volume change (mv) can be
assumed to be 0.13m2/MN. The value of pore water coefficient A has been
determined in the laboratory and equals 0.35. The Young’s modulus for the clay is
estimated as 55MN/m2. Estimate the total settlement of the foundation

3m
6m

q= 160kN/m2 3m

2m

3m 1.5m

4.5m
17m
7.5m

10.5m

10.5m

Figure 5.19 Example 5.5

Solution

The base is not wide enough and the clay layer is not thin to induce one dimensional
consolidation. Lateral strain will take place and it is necessary to add both immediate
and consolidation settlements.

i) Immediate settlement

From Figure 5.4 which gives coefficients for vertical displacement proposed by
Janbu (1956).

H/B = 15/6 = 2.5 and D/B = 2/6 = 0.33

L/B = 6/6 =1

Therefore, μ0 = 0.91 and μ1 = 0.6

si = μ0 μ1 qB/Eu = 0.91x0.60x160x6/55 = 9.5mm

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

92 Settlement of Soils

Consolidation settlement is best worked out in a tabular form with reference to

Fadum’s charts as shown on Figure 5.6 and (

Table 5. 5).

Table 5. 5 Consolidation settlement for Example 5.5

layer z (m) Factors m, Ir Δσ1’=4*Ir*q soed

(Mid layer) and n For 4 rectangles =mv* Δσ1*dh

1 1.5 2 0.233 149 58.1

2 4.5 0.67 0.121 78 30.4

3 7.5 0.4 0.060 38 14.8

4 10.5 0.285 0.0333 21 8.2

5 13.5 0.222 0.021 13 5.1

Total soed 116.6

A = 0.35 and μ = 0.55 from Figure 5.18

sc = μ*soed = 0.55*116.6 = 64mm

Total settlement = si + sc

= 9+64 = 73mm

5.4.4 Degree of consolidation

Consolidation settlement can be compared to load on a spring in a water cylinder

(Figure 5.20). The cylinder has a piston which loads the soil. The water in the cylinder
can only escape through a valve. When the piston initially exerts force on the spring
the load will be taken by the water and the spring will not be loaded. But the water
then develops a pressure and escapes through the valve. As the water escapes the
spring is compressed and it also takes up load. The load is being transferred from the
water to the spring. The spring represents the soil skeleton and the water represents
the water in the void space of the soil. The valve represents the void space in the soil
along which the water in the soil structure escapes.

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

93 Settlement of Soils

load

piston
valve

spring water

Figure 5.20 Spring analogy for consolidation settlement

The degree of consolidation can be described as the ratio of the consolidation at the
time t to the total consolidation.

The progress of consolidation can be now explained with reference to Figure

5.21 where a clay stratum 2d thick is subjected to a surface pressure p. The clay strata
is overlaid and underlain by permeable layers of sand. Under the influence of the load
the clay layer will begin to compress as the excess pore water from in the pores is
compressed out of the clay strata. The water will flow to the top side and to the bottom
end in a double drainage. In the initial loading at time to the entire load is taken by the
pore water pressure and the effective stress is zero. The pore water pressure reduces
and the effective pressure increases as the pore water reduces. For each point in the
clay layer there is a pore water pressure exists which changes with time. For a given
time, t, it is possible to trace points with equal pore pressure called isochrones. Values
of pore water pressure u0 u1 etc and respective void ratios e0, e1, etc at times t0, t1 etc
are shown on Equation 5.16 represents the composition of the total pressure at all
times of the loading at any point. The slope of the isochrone at any depth represents
the hydraulic gradient and the direction of flow.

𝒑 = 𝒑̄ + 𝒖 Equation 5.16

p
Uα, U4 U3 U2 U1 Uo
Sand
eα e4 e e e1 e0
3 2

2d
Clay 2d

Sand U0

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

94 Settlement of Soils

Figure 5.21 Progress of consolidation

From the definition of degree of consolidation cited above, for each element of soil at
a depth z the degree of consolidation can be expressed in terms of the void ratio at
different times of the consolidation as shown in Equation 5.17. The phase diagram
shown on Figure 5.22 shows the variation of void ratio with consolidation.
𝒆 −𝒆
𝑼𝒛 = 𝒆 𝟎−𝒆 𝒕 Equation 5.17
𝟎 ∞

Where

e0 is the void ratio just before the start of consolidation

e is the void ratio at the time t during consolidation

e∞ is the void ratio at the end of consolidation

U1

Ut

water
U∞

vv=e0 vv=e1 vv=et vv=e∞

solids
v=1 v=1 v=1 v=1

Figure 5.22 Variation of void ration and pore water pressure with consolidation

If it is assumed that the e-p curve is linear over the stress range in question as shown
on Figure 5.23 then the degree of consolidation can be expressed in effective pressure
values as shown in Equation 5.18
𝒑′ −𝒑′
𝑼𝒛 = 𝒑′𝒕 −𝒑𝒐′ Equation 5.18
𝜶 𝟎

Where p’∞ is the applied effective pressure at the end of consolidation

p’0 is the effective pressure at the commencement of testing

p’t is the effective pressure at time t of testing

The value of Uz lies between 0 and 1. If the total stress is increased from p0 to p1 the
effective pressure will initially not change but remain at p0’ and will increase as the
pore water pressure is dissipated. The effective pressure will increase as the pore
water pressure reduces (Δp’=-Δu). The increase in effective pressure at the end of

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

95 Settlement of Soils

consolidation will equal the applied pressure which is equal to the increase in the pore
water pressure at the beginning of the consolidation. This scenario is illustrated in
Figure 5.23. Equation 5.18 can be rewritten in terms of the pore water pressure at
various stages of consolidation as shown on Equation 5.19
𝑼𝟎 −𝑼𝒕
𝑼𝒛 = Equation 5.19
𝑼𝟎

Where: -

Uo is the increase in pore pressure at the beginning of consolidation

Ut is the pore pressure at time t

e0
et
eα

Ut
U0

p0 pt pα
p

Figure 5.23 Assumed linear e-σ relationship

For the entire layer of clay, the consolidation remaining at the beginning of
consolidation is represented by the entire area U0*2H. As the consolidation progresses
the remaining consolidation is represented by the area under each isochrone. The
consolidation achieved is represented by the area outside the isochrone. For time t 1 in
Figure 5.21 this is represented by the hatched area. The degree of consolidation
achieved can therefore be expressed by Equation 5.20.
𝑼𝒐∗𝟐𝑯−𝒂𝒓𝒆𝒂 𝒖𝒏𝒅𝒆𝒓 𝒊𝒔𝒐𝒄𝒉𝒓𝒐𝒏𝒆
𝑼𝒛 = Equation 5.20
𝑼𝒐∗𝟐𝑯

5.4.5 Terzaghi’s Theory of One-Dimensional Consolidation Settlement

The assumptions in the theory are:

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

96 Settlement of Soils

1) The soil is homogenous

2) The soil is fully saturated.

3) The solid particles and water are incompressible.

4) The compression and flow are only in the vertical direction

5) Strains are small.

6) Darcy’s law is valid at all hydraulic gradients.

7) The coefficient of permeability (k) and the coefficient of volume

compressibility (mv) remain constant throughout the process

8) There is a unique relationship, independent of time, between void ratio and

the effective stress

Limitations to the assumptions

Assumption 1- The soils in practice are not homogenous

Assumption 6 - At low hydraulic gradients Darcy’s law is not completely

applicable

Assumption 7 The coefficient of permeability (k) decreases as the consolidation

takes place and the void ratio reduces. The coefficient of volume
change (mv) also changes since e-σ’ relationship is not linear

Assumption 8 This is the main limitation. The relationship between void ratio
and effective stress is not independent of time. This is because
the as time progresses and the consolidation takes place the void
ratio and the effective stress changes

The consolidation theory can be derived from consideration of the element shown on
Figure 5.24 The theory relies on Darcy’s law of the flow of the water vertically through
the element and the definition of coefficient of volume change (mv)

z
dx.dy
2d
dz

vz

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

97 Settlement of Soils

Figure 5.24 Element under one dimensional consolidation

For the element shown, as consolidation takes place the change in element volume is
due to the vertical deformation of the element. The vertical flow of water is given by
Darcy’s Equation.
𝜕ℎ
𝑣𝑧 = 𝑘𝑖𝑧 = −𝑘
𝜕𝑧
Since the change in head is occasioned by the change in the pore water pressure
𝑘 𝜕𝑢 𝜕𝑢
𝑣𝑧 = − 𝛾𝑤 𝜕𝑧 Since 𝜕ℎ = 𝛾
𝑤

𝒅𝒗𝒛 𝒌 𝝏𝟐 𝒖
=−
𝒅𝒛 𝜸𝒘 𝝏𝒛𝟐
The volume of water entering the element per unit time vertically is

𝑣𝑧 ∗ 𝑑𝑥𝑑𝑦

The volume of water leaving per unit time vertically is

𝜕𝑣𝑧
𝑣𝑧 ∗ 𝑑𝑥𝑑𝑦 + 𝑑𝑧 ∗ 𝑑𝑥𝑑𝑦
𝜕𝑧
The volume changes in unit time (dV/dt) is the difference of the water leaving the
element and the water entering the element.

𝜕𝑣𝑧 𝑘 𝜕 2𝑢 𝑑𝑉
𝑑𝑧𝑑𝑥𝑑𝑦 = − 2
𝑑𝑥𝑑𝑦𝑑𝑧 =
𝜕𝑧 𝛾𝑤 𝜕𝑧 𝑑𝑡
𝒌 𝝏𝟐 𝒖 𝒅𝑽
− 𝜸𝒘 𝝏𝒛𝟐 𝒅𝒙𝒅𝒚𝒅𝒛 = Equation 5.21
𝒅𝒕

The coefficient of volume change (ratio of the volumetric change to the unit of
pressure increase) can be rewritten as:
𝑑𝑉 𝑑𝑉
𝑚𝑣 = =−
𝑉𝜕𝜎′ 𝑉𝜕𝑢
𝑑𝑉 = −𝑚𝑣 𝑉𝜕𝑢 = −𝑚𝑣 𝜕𝑢𝑑𝑥𝑑𝑦𝑑𝑧
𝒅𝑽 𝝏𝒖
= −𝒎𝒗 𝒅𝒕 𝒅𝒙𝒅𝒚𝒅𝒛 Equation 5.22
𝒅𝒕

Combining Equation 5.21 and 5.22 gives the differential equation for consolidation
which relates the pore water pressure (u) with depth (z) and the time t from the
instantaneous application of the total stress (Equation 5.23).

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

98 Settlement of Soils

𝝏𝒖 𝒌 𝝏𝟐 𝒖 𝝏𝒖 𝝏𝟐 𝒖
𝒎𝒗 𝒅𝒕 = 𝜸 or = 𝒄𝒗 𝒅𝒛𝟐 Equation 5.23
𝒘 𝒅𝒛𝟐 𝒅𝒕

This result in Equation 5.24 which is used to obtain cv defined as the coefficient of
consolidation (m2/year). k and mv are assumed constant during consolidation and
therefore cv is also constant over the consolidation period
𝒌
𝒄𝒗 = 𝒎 Equation 5.24
𝒗 𝜸𝒘

The differential equation describes the distribution of the hydrostatic excess pressure
with time as well as along the depth z. A solution to equation 5.23 leads to the
determination of the excess pore water pressures at different time intervals. It gives
the mathematical solution of the isochrones shown on Figure 5.21

Solution of the consolidation equation

The clay is assumed to be bound by free draining high permeability granular

materials. The mathematical description of the boundary conditions for the layer of
thickness 2d at the beginning of the consolidation (t=0) and at time t inside the
consolidation is given by

𝑢 = 0 → 𝑎𝑡 0 ≤ 𝑧 < 2𝑑 𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑛 𝑡 = 0 -

Representing the condition before the load is applied

𝑢 = 0 → 𝑎𝑡 𝑧 = 0 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑧 = 2𝑑 𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑛 𝑡⟩0

Representing the condition upon application of load and commencement of

consolidation

The mathematical solution for the consolidation Equation can be made for different
boundary conditions. The main practical concern is the degree of consolidation of the
clay strata under load. The solution for the differential Equation is of the form of
Equation 5.25
𝟐 𝑴𝒛 𝟐𝑻 )
𝑼𝒛 = 𝟏 − ∑∝𝟎 𝑴 (𝒔𝒊𝒏 ) ∗ 𝒆(−𝑴 𝒗 Equation 5.25
𝒅

Where M is a variable varying from 0 to infinite

Uz is the degree of consolidation

TV is a dimensionless number called time factor given by Equation 5.26

𝒄𝒗 𝒕
𝑻𝒗 = Equation 5.26
𝒅𝟐

Graphical solutions have been developed to ease the solution of the otherwise very
complex consolidation. Figure 5.25 shows typical isochrones for different boundary

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

99 Settlement of Soils

conditions and various values of Tv. The various boundary conditions result in
various initial distribution of the excess pore water pressure and the drainage
conditions at the boundary of the clay layers.

Both upper and lower layers

are draining. The initial
distribution of pressure is
uniform. The upper half of
this case is called half closed
layer

In this case of open layer, the

distribution of the ui is
triangular though it is
draining on both top and
bottom.

In this case the half-closed

layer is having a ui in a
triangular shape but will
drain to the top only.

Figure 5.25 Isochrones for various boundary conditions (After Craig, 1987)

The initial variation of the pore water pressure can be approximated to linear
distribution. Curves 1, 2 and 3 on Figure 5.26 represent the solution to the
consolidation equation for the linear distribution of initial pore water pressure cases
shown on Figure 5.27

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

100 Settlement of Soils

Figure 5.26 Average degree of consolidation U vs time factor Tv

Figure 5.27 Initial variation of excess pore water pressure

5.4.6 Determination of coefficient of consolidation

Two methods are available for the determination of the coefficient of consolidation
from the odometer data by curve fitting data from the test with a theoretical curve.
The two methods are log time method and the square root fitting method Once the
coefficient of consolidation has been determined the coefficient of permeability may
be determined from Equation 5.24. (cv=k/ (mv ɣ*w)

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

101 Settlement of Soils

The log time method

Figure 5.28 shows both experimental and theoretical curves. In the experimental
curve the dial reading of the odometer are plotted against time in minutes on a log
scale. The theoretical curve shows the plot of average degree of consolidation plotted
against the logarithm of the time factor. The theoretical curve consists of an initial
curve which approximates a parabola, a linear portion and a final part which is
horizontal and asymptote to U = 1.0 (100%). In the experimental curve the initial
portion is approximately parabolic. To determine U=0-point, two points A and B on
the initial curve are marked. The values of time are in the ratio of 1 to 4. The vertical
distance between them is measured. An equal distance is marked above the first point.
This upper point (as) represents the U=0. The point as will not correspond to the initial
dial reading a0. The difference arises as a result of compression of small quantities of
air in the soil. The soil is usually marginally below 100% saturation. The portion as to
a0 is initial compression.

The 100% compression is obtained by intersecting the mid straight portion

and the final straight portion. The point of intersection can be named a100. The
intersection can regard as the end of the primary compression as determined by use
of the Terzaghi’s consolidation theory. The point of U=50% is located midway
between as and a100. The coefficient of consolidation is obtained from Equation 5.27.
The consolidation beyond a100 is secondary compression and continues to take place
on the soil for an indefinite time.
𝟎.𝟏𝟗𝟔𝒅𝟐
𝒄𝒗 = Equation 5.27
𝒕𝟓𝟎

Where

Tv is 0.196 for U at 50%, (Figure 5.26)

d is taken half the average thickness of the sample for the particular pressure
increment.

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

102 Settlement of Soils

Figure 5.28 The log time method

The root time method

Figure 5.29 shows the form of theoretical curves and laboratory curves where the dial
gauge reading values have been plotted against the square root time in minutes. The
average degree of consolidation when plotted against the time factor presents a linear
curve up to about 60% consolidation and at 90% consolidation the abscissa (AC) is 1.15
times the abscissa (AB).

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

103 Settlement of Soils

Figure 5.29 The root time method

The laboratory curve consists of an initial linear portion consisting of initial

compression due to presence of air which is expelled to get the sample to full
saturation. It is then followed by a straight-line portion. The linear portion is extended
back to cross the Y axis at the point D corresponding to U=0. Point D is called the
corrected zero point. A straight-line DE is drawn such that its abscissa is 1.15 times
the abscissa of the laboratory curve. The value of TV corresponding to U=90% is 0.848
(Figure 5.26) and the coefficient of consolidation can be obtained from Equation 5.28
The U=100% can be obtained by proportion.
𝟎.𝟖𝟒𝟖𝒅𝟐
𝒄𝒗 = Equation 5.28
𝒕𝟗𝟎

Where

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

104 Settlement of Soils

Tv is 0.848 for U at 90%, (Figure 5.26)

d is taken half the average thickness of the sample for the particular pressure
increment.

Compression ratios

The relative magnitude of the initial compression, compression due to primary

consolidation and the secondary consolidation can be expressed by the following
ratios derived from the laboratory curves (Figure 5.28 and Figure 5.29)
𝑎 −𝑎
Initial compression ratio: 𝑟𝑜 = 𝑎 𝑜−𝑎 𝑠
𝑜 𝑓

𝑎𝑠 −𝑎100
Primary compression ratio (log time): 𝑟𝑝 = 𝑎𝑜 −𝑎𝑓

10/9 (𝑎𝑠 −𝑎90 )

Primary compression ratio (root time): 𝑟𝑝 = (𝑎𝑜 −𝑎𝑓 )

Secondary compression ratio : 𝑟𝑠 = 1 − (𝑟𝑜 + 𝑟𝑝 )

The model law of consolidation

If two layers of the same clay with different drainage paths d1 and d2 are acted by the
same pressure increase and reach the same degree of consolidation at times t1 and t2,
then their coefficients of consolidation and their dimensionless time factors must be
the same. This analogy enables prediction of the degree of consolidation at various
times for a layer of consolidating soil which has been tested in the laboratory.
Equation 5.29 shows the relationship to be utilized.
𝑐𝑣1 𝑡1 𝑐𝑣2 𝑡2
𝑇𝑣1 = 2 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑇𝑣2 =
𝑑1 𝑑2 2

Now Tv1 = Tv2 and cv1= cv2

𝒕𝟏 𝒕𝟐
= Equation 5.29
𝒅𝟏 𝟐 𝒅𝟐 𝟐

5.4.7 Secondary compression

Terzaghi’s theory assumes that the change in the void ratio is due to a change in
effective stress brought about by dissipation of excess pore water pressure with
permeability alone governing the time it takes to dissipate the pore water pressure.
However, consolidation continues after the pore water pressure has dissipated to zero.
The secondary compression is due to gradual readjustment of the clay particles to a
more stable configuration following structural disturbance caused by decrease in the
void ratio. The second reason for the secondary consolidation is the displacement
which takes place laterally in thick clay layers. Secondary compression takes place

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

105 Settlement of Soils

over long periods. In the field considerable time takes place as the consolidation takes
place. As the pore water dissipates the particles also realign themselves. The primary
and secondary takes place at the same time. The terms primary and secondary can
therefore be regarded as one continuous consolidation process.

The rate of secondary consolidation is controlled by the highly viscous film of

adsorbed water. The adsorbed water flows and allows the solid particles to come
together. The rate of the secondary compression in the odometer can be defined by
the slope of the final part of the compression log time curve. The secondary
compression is high for normally consolidated soils and lower for the over-
consolidated soils. The ratio of secondary compression to the total compression
increases as the ratio of the initial pressure increment to the initial pressure decreases.
The odometer secondary compression characteristics cannot be extrapolated to full
scale in-situ conditions.

5.4.8 Correction for the construction period

In practice the load applied to soil is applied over a construction period. At the
beginning of the construction it is normal to start with excavation. This initial stage is
accompanied by swelling of the clay layer. As loading proceeds at some time t 1 the
net pressure on the clay stratum equals zero. At this time the construction weight
equals the excavated weight. The swelling is eliminated and the consolidation starts.
Graphical presentation of the load is shown on Figure 5.30.

t1 t2
p’

t/2 t2/2 t
Excavation
period

C D
t/2
t2/2
B
A t2/2 Corrected curve

Instantaneous curve

Figure 5.30 Consolidation during construction

A load time curve is plotted assuming that the load p’’ is applied at time t1. This
assumes instant application of pressure p’. The corrected curve is made on the same
plot by assuming that the actual consolidation at the end of time t2 has the same value

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

106 Settlement of Soils

as the consolidation on the instant curve at 1/2t2. Point A on the instantaneous curve
corresponding to 1/2t2 is plotted. Point B with the same settlement is plotted to meet
the ordinate of time t2 at B. To establish other points on the curve, select time t and
calculate the settlement at time 1/2t. This is point C. Draw a horizontal line through
C to meet the ordinate of the time t (D). Points beyond B on the corrected curve are
displaced horizontally by distance AB from the instantaneous curve.

Example 5. 6

The following compression readings were taken during and odometer test on a
saturated clay (Gs = 2.73) when applied pressure was increased from 214 to 429
kN/m2. After 1440 minutes the thickness of the sample was 13.60mm and the water
content was 35.9%.

Time (min) 0 1/4 1/2 1 2.25 4 9 16 25

Gauge (mm) 5 4.67 4.62 4.53 4.41 4.28 4.01 3.75 3.49

Time (min) 36 49 64 81 100 200 400 1440

Gauge (mm) 3.28 3.15 3.06 3.00 2.96 2.84 2.76 2.61

Determine

1) The coefficient of consolidation from the log time and the root time plots

2) The value of the coefficient of permeability.

3) The three compression ratios.

Solution

Total change in thickness during the pressure increment = 5.000-2.61 =2.39mm

Average thickness during the pressure increment = 13.60+2.39/2 = 14.80mm

Length of the average drainage path = 14.80/2 = 7.40mm

From log time plot (Figure 5.28)

t50 = 12.5 min

0.196𝑑 2 0.196𝑥7.402
𝑐𝑣 = = 𝑚𝑚2 /𝑚𝑖𝑛
𝑡50 12.5

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

107 Settlement of Soils

0.196𝑥7.402 60𝑥24𝑥365 2
= 𝑥 𝑚 /𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟
12.5 106
= 0.45𝑚2 /𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟
5 − 4.79
𝑟0 = = 0.088
5 − 2.61
4.79 − 2.98
𝑟𝑝 = = 0.757
5 − 2.61
𝑟𝑠 = 1 − (0.088 + 0.757) = 0.155

From root time plot (Figure 5.31)

√t90=7.3 min

t90= 53.3min

0.848𝑑 2 0.848𝑥7.402
𝑐𝑣 = = 𝑚𝑚2 /𝑚𝑖𝑛
𝑡90 53.3
0.848𝑥7.402 60𝑥24𝑥365 2
= 𝑥 𝑚 /𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟
12.5 106
= 0.46𝑚2 /𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟

Calculate the ratios based on the root time plot

In order to get permeability, the value of mv must be calculated

Final void ratio = e1 = w1 Gs = 0.359x2.73 = 0.98

Initial void ratio = e1+Δe

𝛥𝑒 𝛥𝐻
=
1 + 𝑒0 𝐻0
𝛥𝑒 1 + 𝑒0
=
𝛥𝐻 𝐻0
𝛥𝑒 1.98 + 𝛥𝑒
= ∴ 𝛥𝑒 = 0.35 ⥂ 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑒0 = 1.33
2.39 15.99
𝑎𝑛𝑑
1 𝑒0 − 𝑒1
𝑚𝑣 = 𝑥 = 7.0𝑥10−4 𝑚2 /𝑘𝑁 = 0.70𝑚2 /𝑀𝑁
1 + 𝑒0 𝜎1 − 𝜎0

Coefficient of permeability

k=cvmvγw = (0.45x0.70x9.8)/(60x60x24x365x103)

= 1x10-10m/s

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

108 Settlement of Soils

Example 5. 7

During a pressure increment a sample test attained 25% consolidation in 5 minutes

with a mean thickness of 18mm. How long will the soil strata with the same pressure
increment reach the same consolidation if the stratum is 20 metres thick if

i) The soil is drained at the top and at the bottom of the stratum.

ii) The soil is drained at the top only

Solution

In the consolidation test the sample drains at the top and at the bottom

d1=18/2= 9mm

With the stratum draining on both sides

d2 = 20/2 = 10m = 10,000mm

𝑡1 2 5𝑥10,0002 1 1 1
𝑡2 = ∗ 𝑑2 = ∗ ∗ ∗ = 11.7𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠
𝑑1 2 92 60 24 365

With the stratum draining on one side

𝑡2 = 4 ∗ 11.7 = 47𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠

Summary of Settlement

1) The two types of settlement include immediate and consolidation settlements

𝑞𝐵
2) For rigid foundations on cohesive soils, immediate settlement 𝑠𝑖 = (1 −
𝐸
𝜈 2 )𝐼𝑠
𝑞𝐵
3) Immediate settlement for a thin clay layer is 𝑠𝑖 = 𝜇𝑜 𝜇1 𝐸
4) The immediate settlement of cohesionless soils is best determined by field tests
which include plate bearing test and cone penetrometer test
5) Consolidation is the gradual reduction in volume of a fully saturated soil of
low permeability due to drainage of some pore water.
6) Total Settlement of a clay layer = ρc = ∑H
0 mv ∗ dp ∗ H
7) Consolidation settlement can be compared to load on a spring in a water
cylinder
𝑘
8) Coefficient of consolidation is 𝑐𝑣 = 𝑚
𝑣 𝛾𝑤

9) Determination of coefficient of consolidation is best done by graphical plotting

of odometer data (log method of root time method)
𝑐𝑣 𝑡
10) TV is a dimensionless number called time factor given by 𝑇𝑣 = 𝑑2

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

109 Settlement of Soils

11) The time factor Tv is related to degree of consolidation U and is best obtained
graphically
12) If two layers of the same clay with different drainage paths d1 and d2 are acted
by the same pressure increase and reach the same degree of consolidation at
times t1 and t2, then their coefficients of consolidation and their dimensionless
𝑐𝑣1 𝑡1 𝑐𝑣2 𝑡2
time factors must be the same. 𝑇𝑣1 = 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑇𝑣2 = then Now Tv1 =
𝑑1 2 𝑑2 2
Tv2 and cv1= cv2
𝑡1 𝑡
13) Then = 𝑑 22 for the determination when clay reaches a degree of
𝑑1 2 2
consolidation

Tutorial Examples on Chapter Five

5.1 The buildings on 2.22 exert the following pressure upon the soil below the foundation:
- A = 150 kN/m2 and B = 250 kN/m2. Boreholes have proved a soft clay layer 2.8metres
deep at a depth of 24 metres to the top of the layer. The coefficient of volume change
(mv) of the clay is 1x10-3 m2/kN.
i) Use the Newmark’s charts and the Fadum’s charts to calculate the increase in
the pressure at the middle of the clay.

ii) Calculate the settlement of the clay

P B

Scale 1:1,000

Figure 2.22 Question 2.1

2.2 A large building increases the vertical stress in a layer of clay underneath by 100kN/m2
throughout the thickness of the clay.

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

110 Settlement of Soils

Building

8metre thick clay layer mv = 1x10-4 m2/kN

cv = 0.4 m2/month

Sand layer – of high permeability

i) What will be the ultimate consolidation ρ∞ settlement?

ii) How long will the building take to settle by 0.04m

Aide memoir
Let it be t months
ρt= 0.04m from I, U = ρt/ ρ∞
from U vs Tv curve 1 obtain Tv corresponding to the calculated U
From
𝒄𝒗 𝒕
𝑻𝒗 = 𝒅𝟐

Calculate t
iii) How much settlement will have occurred after 2 months?
iv) How long will it take to have a residual consolidation of 0.02m remaining
v) Calculate the coefficient of permeability of the clay in m/sec
Ans. (i), 0.08m (ii) 7.88 months, (iii), 0.0202m (iv) 19.2 months, (v) 1.52x10-10 m/sec

2.3 Use Tv U curves to estimate the time required to reach the degree of consolidation in
the following cases

i) Odometer test, sample thickness – 20mm

Degree of consolidation - 90%, cv = 1x10-8 m2/sec
ii) Embankment of granular material on clay layer 8-metre-thick over heavily fissured
rock

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417

111 Settlement of Soils

Degree of consolidation - 50%, cv = 3 m2/sec

iii) Embankment of granular material on clay layer 8-metre-thick over dense rock
Degree of consolidation - 50%
cv = 3 m2/sec
Ans. (i), 141min (ii) 1.05yrs, (iii), 4.20yrs

Foundation Engineering, I: - ECV 4417