FOUNDATION ENGINEERING

Dr. Toufigh

Chapter 2

Natural Soil Deposits

and Subsoil Exploration

1
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr.
Toufigh
Chapter 2

SPT

2
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 2

SPT Correlations for Cohesive Soils

3
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 2

SPT Correlations
The following qualifications should be noted when
standard penetration resistance values are used to estimate soil
parameters:
approximate.
1. The equations are
2. Becausegiven borehole
the soil is not homogeneous, the values of 𝑁60 obtained
from a vary widely.
3. In soil deposits that contain large boulders and gravel, standard
penetration numbers may be erratic and unreliable.

4
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 2

Example
In the case of a standard penetration test, the required numbers of impact for
penetration of a sampler in order was 14, 16 and 17. The test was performed in
15 m depth of a saturated sandy soil deposit. If the borehole diameter equal to
150 mm, calculate the N value for available energy level. (γsat = 18 kN/m3)

Solution
𝑑 = 100𝑚𝑚 (D borehole 150mm  D hammer 100 mm) 𝐶𝑑 = 1
standard sample 𝐶𝑠 = 1
𝐿 = 15𝑚 > 10𝑚 𝐶𝑟 = 1
1 1
𝐶𝑁 = 10 ′ = 10
𝜎𝑣
10 10
𝑁 = 𝑁2 + 𝑁3 × 𝐶𝑁(18
× 𝐶−𝑑 × 𝐶𝑟 × 𝐶𝑠=
= 16 + 17 × = 30
10) ∗ 15 11 11
5
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr.
Toufigh
Chapter 2

SPT

ADVANTAGES: DISADVANTAGES
• Obtain both a sample & a :• Obtain both a sample & a number
number • Disturbed sample (index tests only)
• Simple and uneven • Crude number for analysis
• Suitable in manyweak
soil types • Not applicable in soft clays & silts
• Can perform in rocks • High variability and
• Available throughout the world uncertainty

6
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 2

Cone Penetration Test (CPT)

7
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 2

Cone Penetration Test (CPT)

8
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 2

Cone Penetration Test (CPT)

9
 FOUNDATION
Dr. Toufigh ENGINEERING
Chapter 2

Cone Penetration Test (CPT)

• The cone penetration test (CPT), originally known as the
Dutch cone
penetration test.
• The test is also called the static penetration test, and no boreholes are
necessary to perform it.
• More suitable to soft clays, silt, and fine to medium sands
• Standard ASTM D 3441
• In the original version, a cone with a base area of 10 𝑐𝑚2 was
pushed into the ground at a steady rate of about 20 mm/sec.
• Measures at least cone resistance (qc ) & cone side friction (qs )
• Many CPT devices are able to measure pore pressure
(CPTU) 10
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 2

Cone Penetration Test (CPT)

11
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 2

Cone Penetration Test (CPT)

Friction Ratio (FR )

qs
RF = ×
qc
100

 q s : frictional resistance

 q c : cone resistance

12
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 2

Cone Penetration Test (CPT)

Interpretation of test results

13
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 2

Cone Penetration Test (CPT)

Correlation between 𝒒𝒄 and 𝑵𝟔𝟎

General range of variation 𝑞 𝑐 / 𝑁60 14

 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 2

Cone Penetration Test (CPT)

Correlations between 𝒒𝒄 Soil Types
Robertson and Campanella (1983) provided
the correlations between 𝑞𝑐 and the friction
ratio to identify various types of soil
encountered in the field.

15
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 2

Cone Penetration Test (CPT)

Correlations between 𝒒𝒄 and undrained shear strength (𝒄𝒖 )
𝑞𝑐 − 𝜎0
𝑐𝑢 =
𝑁𝑘
𝜎0= total vertical stress

𝑁𝑘= cone tip factor and it depends on the geometry of the and the
cone
amount of Mean value of 𝑁𝑘 can be related to PI as below:
penetration.
𝑃𝐼 − 10
𝑁𝑘 = 19 − 𝑃𝐼 > 10
5

Correlations between 𝒇𝒓 and sensitivity (𝑺𝒕 )

10
𝑆� ≅
�
𝑓𝑟 (%
) 16
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 2

Cone Penetration Test (CPT)

17
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 2

Cone Penetration Test (CPT)

18
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 2

Vane Shear Test

 Field vane shear tests are moderately rapid and economical
and are used extensively in field soil-exploration programs.
 The test gives good results in soft and medium-stiff clays and gives
excellent results in determining the properties of sensitive clays.
 VeryUseful for Measuring
Undrained Shear Resistance of
Soft Clayey Soils (𝑐 𝑢 )
 The shear vane device consists of four thin metal blades welded
orthogonally (90°) to a rod.
 The vane is pushed, usually from the bottom of a borehole, to the
desired depth. A torque is applied at a rate of 6° per minute by a
torque head device located above the soil surface and attached to the
shear vane rod.

19
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 2

Vane Shear Test

 As the maximum torque is obtained,
the undrained shear resistance (𝑐 𝑢 ) can
be calculated as follows:
𝑐𝑢 = 𝑇
𝐾

π𝐷 3 1
𝐾= +
𝐻2 3
𝐷
 T: Torque (kN.m)

 D: Diameter (m)

 H: Height (m)

 𝑐 𝑢 : Undrained Shear Resistance (kPa)

20
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 2

Vane Shear Test

21
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 2

Vane Shear Test

Vane Shear vs. Cone Penetration Test device

22
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 2

Vane Shear Test

23
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 2

Vane Shear Test

ASTM Recommended Dimensions of Field Vanes

(ASTM D-2573)

24
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 2

Vane Shear Test

• Sources of significant error in the field vane shear test are

calibration
poor of torque measurement damaged vanes.
and
• For actual design purposes, the undrained shear too high,
strength values
obtained from field vane shear tests are and
it is recommended that they be corrected according to the equation:

𝐶 𝑢(𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑒𝑑) = 𝜆𝐶 𝑢(𝑖𝑛 𝑠𝑖𝑡 𝑢 𝑉𝑆𝑇)

𝜆 : Correction factor

25
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 2

Vane Shear Test

Bjerrum (1972)

𝐼𝑃 =𝑃𝐼 = 𝐿𝐿 − 𝑃𝐿

After the maximum torque is obtained, the shear vane is rotated an

additional 8 to 10 revolutions to measure the residual torque, Tr .
The ratio of the maximum torque to the residual torque issoil
thesensitivity,
St .
𝑇𝑚𝑎𝑥
𝑆� =
� 𝑇𝑟
26
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 2

Vane Shear Test

27
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 2

Vane Shear Test

28
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 2

Pressuremeter Test (PMT)

29
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 2

Pressuremeter Test (PMT)

 The probe (Menard pressuremeter) is placed at the desired depth
and pressure is applied. The pressure is raised in stages at constant
time intervals, andvolume changes are recorded at each
stage.
 A pressure–volume
elastic modulus, shearchange curvepassive
modulus, is then and
drawn fromlateral
at rest whichearth
the

pressure coefficients and undrained shear strength

may be
estimated.
 This test is usually used for the estimation the properties of soft
clay, silt and fine sands.

30
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 2

Pressuremeter Test (PMT)

 One of the disadvantages of this test method is the soil is previously
disturbed due to predrilled borehole. Soil disturbance is small when
self-boring pressuremeters are used.
 Pressuremeters are
more costly than CPT and the flat
plate dilatometer (will be discussed later) and are not widely
available.
drainage condition
 The is unknown, and this leads to
uncertainty in
the interpretation of the shear modulus and shear strength.

31
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 2

Pressuremeter Test (PMT)

Pressuremeter probe

32
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 2

Pressuremeter Test (PMT)

Pressuremeter probe Drilling the bore hole Insert the pressuremeter

by wet rotary probe into the bore hole
33
method
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 2

Pressuremeter Test (PMT)

34
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 2

Plate Load Test

 Common shapes: square and circular. The test is carried out in a
of depth of at least 1.5 m. Loading is continued until the soil fails
pit
settlements are in excess of 10% of the plate
or
 diameter.
Useful for Obtaining Bearing Capacity, Settlements and Constrained
Modulus
 Further discussions will be presented in the later chapters…

35
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 2

Plate Load Test

36
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 2

Flat plate Dilatometer Test

• The flat plate dilatometer consists of a tapered blade. On the flat face
of the blade, the dilatometer is a flexible steel membrane. The blade is
attached to drill rods and is pushed into the soil.
• Gas and electric lines extend from the surface control box, through
the penetrometer rod, and into the blade. At the required depth, high-
pressure nitrogen gas is used to inflate the membrane. Three pressure
is recorded.
1. The pressure at which the plate contacts the soil.
2. The pressure at which the plate pushes soil approx. 1.1 mm.
3. The pressure at which the plate returns to its initial position.

37
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 2

Flat plate Dilatometer Test

38
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 2

Flat plate Dilatometer Test

39
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 2

Flat plate Dilatometer Test

40
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 2

Flat plate Dilatometer Test

The test is normally conducted at depths 200 to 300 mm apart. The result of
a given test is used to determine three parameters:

1. Undrained shear
strength
2. Over consolidation ratio

3. Elastic modulus

41
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr.
Toufigh
Chapter 2

Boring Log

42
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh

Chapter 3

Shallow foundations:
Ultimate bearing capacity

1
FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 3

Aim: Determining Ultimate Load Capacity (𝑞 𝑢 𝑙 𝑡 )

 At ultimate load capacity (𝑞 𝑢 𝑙 𝑡 ) shear failure

occurs.

2
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 3

Failure of Foundations:

3
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 3

Failure of Foundations:

4
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 3

Failure of Foundations:

5
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 3

Introduction
• Terzaghi defined a Shallow foundation as one in which the embedment depth
𝐷𝑓 is less than or equal to the (𝐷𝑓/𝐵 ≤ 1)
width 𝐵
• However, research studies conducted since then have shown that 𝐷𝑓/𝐵 can be
as large as 3 to for shallow foundations.
4

6
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 3

Introduction
 Shallow foundations must have two main characteristics:

I. They have to be safe against overall shear in the soil that

failure
supports them.

II. They cannot undergo under excessive displacement, or

settlement.

 The load per unit area of the foundation at which shear failure in soil
occurs
is called ultimate bearing capacity.

7
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 3

Shear Failure Surface development:

8
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr.
Toufigh
Chapter 3

Shallow Foundation Failure Modes

• General Shear Failure: when the foundation resting on a
dense sand or stiff cohesive soil
• Local Shear Failure: foundation resting on a medium
compacted sand or clayey soil
• Punching Shear Failure: foundation resting on a fairly
loos
soil

9
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 3

General shear failure

• Foundation resting on a dense sand or stiff cohesive soil
• A sudden failure will take place.
• Failure surface in the soil will extend to the ground surface

10
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr.
Toufigh
Chapter 3

General shear failure

III I III

II II

Schematic illustration for the process of formation of

general shear failure
11
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 3

Local shear failure

• medium compacted sand or clayey soil
• Failure surface in the soil will gradually extend outward
from the foundation.

12
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr.
Toufigh
Chapter 3

Local shear failure

II II

Schematic illustration for the process of

formation of local shear failure
13
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr.
Toufigh
Chapter 3

Punching shear failure

• Foundation resting on a fairly loose soil
• The failure surface will not extend to the ground
surface. Beyond the ultimate failure load, qu, the load-
steepwill
settlement plot andbepractically linear.

14
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr.
Toufigh
Chapter 3

Punching shear failure

15
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 3

Prediction of the failure modes

• Vesic (1973) proposed a relationship for the modes of failure of
shallow foundations resting on sand on the basis of his laboratory
investigation

16
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr.
Toufigh
Chapter 3

Shear failure

17
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr.
Toufigh
Chapter 3

Shear failure

18
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr.
Toufigh
Chapter 3

Bearing capacity: Terzaghi (1943)

• Using equilibrium Terzaghi expressed the ultimate bearing
analysis, in the form
capacity
cohesion

Dept
h width

19
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr.
Toufigh
Chapter 3

Bearing capacity: Terzaghi (1943)

• The term q is the effective stress at the depth of Df
• vast variety of relations for determination of Nc, Nq, Nγ can be found in
litreature. therefore, all of them are functions ofinternal friction
angle.
An example of these relations is presented as follows:

a 2 0.75π−φ
Nq= (a = 2 tanφ )
φ
e 2cos2(45 + 2 )

𝑡𝑎𝑛φ 𝐾
Nγ= ( 𝑝γ − 1) Nc =(Nq −1)cotφ
2 2
𝑐𝑜𝑠
• The aforementioned
φ relation between Nc and Nq is accepted by Hansen
and Meyerhof
• Terzaghi used a tedious graphical method to obtain values for Kpγ. There
is a table for Kpγ
20
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 3

Bearing capacity: Terzaghi (1943)

• The results of the previous relations are shown in the following
tabular
form:

* In the case of φ = (merely

0
cohesive soils), the Nc relation will
be changed to the following
relation. Nevertheless, the other
researchers presents different
values for Nc in this case.

Nc = 3π + 1 = 5.7
2

21
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr.
Toufigh
Chapter 3

Bearing capacity: Terzaghi (1943)

• The ultimate bearing capacity can be affected by the shape of
the foundation. The introduction of this effect in the relation
can be implemented as the shape factors.

𝑞𝑢 𝑙 𝑡 =𝑠𝑐 𝑐𝑁𝑐 + 𝑞𝑁𝑞 + 0.5γ𝐵𝑁γ 𝑠γ

Type of foundation 𝑠𝑐 𝑠𝛾
Circular 1.3 0.6
𝐵 𝐵
Rectangular 1 + 0.3( ) 1 − 0.2( )
𝐿 𝐿
Square 1.3 0.8
Strip 1 1

22
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr.
Toufigh
Chapter 3

Bearing capacity: Terzaghi (1943)

Disadvantages:

 Underestimatin the Bearing Capacity of Soils

g
 No Modification for Depth, Inclination of Load, Slope of
the
Foundation and Slope of the adjacent soil deposit

23
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr.
Toufigh
Chapter 3

Bearing capacity: Meyerhof (1951, 1963)

Vertical Load: 𝑞 𝑢 𝑙 𝑡 = 𝑠 𝑐 𝑑 𝑐 𝑐𝑁𝑐 + 𝑠 𝑞 𝑑 𝑞 𝑞̅𝑁𝑞 + [𝑠γ𝑑γ]0.5γ𝐵𝑁γ

Inclined Load: 𝑞 𝑢 𝑙 𝑡 = 𝑑 𝑐 𝑖 𝑐 𝑐𝑁𝑐 + 𝑑 𝑞 𝑖 𝑞 𝑞̅𝑁𝑞 + [𝑑γ𝑖γ]0.5γ𝐵𝑁γ

• In Meyerhof formulation, the shape and inclination effects doesn’t

consider simultaneously.
• The relations for bearing capacity factors are presented as bellow:
tan (45 + φ)
N =(N −1)cotφ N =(N −1)tan(1.4φ)
c q γ q N q = e πtanφ 2
2
• In the case of φ = 0, bearing capacity factors will be as follows:

Nc =π + 2 = 5.14 N γ =0 Nq = 1
24
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr.
Toufigh
Chapter 3

Bearing capacity: Meyerhof (1951, 1963)

25
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr.
Toufigh
Chapter 3

Bearing capacity: Hansen (1970)

𝑞 𝑢 𝑙 𝑡 =[𝑠 𝑐 𝑑 𝑐 𝑖 𝑐 𝑔 𝑐 𝑏 𝑐 ]𝑐𝑁 𝑐 + [𝑠𝑞𝑑𝑞𝑖𝑞𝑔𝑞𝑏𝑞]𝑞̅𝑁𝑞 + [𝑠 γ𝑑 γ𝑖 γ𝑔 γ𝑏 γ ]0.5γ𝐵𝑁 γ

for φ=0 → q ult = 5.14Su(1 + s′c +d′c −i′c −b′c −g′c)+q̅

tan (45 + φ)
N q = e πtanφ 2
2

Nc=(Nq−1)cotφ

Nγ=1.5(Nq−1)tanφ
26
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 3

Bearing capacity: Hansen (1970)

𝑞 𝑢 𝑙 𝑡 = 𝑐𝑁𝑐 𝑠𝑐 𝑑 𝑐 𝑖 𝑐 𝑔 𝑐 𝑏 𝑐 + 𝑞̅𝑁𝑞𝑠𝑞𝑑𝑞𝑖𝑞𝑔𝑞𝑏𝑞 + 0.5γ𝐵𝑁 γ 𝑠 γ 𝑑 γ 𝑖 γ 𝑔 γ 𝑏 γ

27
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr.
Toufigh
Chapter 3

Bearing capacity: Hansen (1970)

𝑞 𝑢 𝑙 𝑡 = 𝑐𝑁𝑐 𝑠𝑐 𝑑 𝑐 𝑖 𝑐 𝑔 𝑐 𝑏 𝑐 + 𝑞̅𝑁𝑞𝑠𝑞𝑑𝑞𝑖𝑞𝑔𝑞𝑏𝑞 + 0.5γ𝐵𝑁 γ 𝑠 γ 𝑑 γ 𝑖 γ 𝑔 γ 𝑏 γ

28
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr.
Toufigh
Chapter 3

Bearing capacity: Hansen (1970)

𝑞 𝑢 𝑙 𝑡 = 𝑐𝑁𝑐 𝑠𝑐 𝑑 𝑐 𝑖 𝑐 𝑔 𝑐 𝑏 𝑐 + 𝑞̅𝑁𝑞𝑠𝑞𝑑𝑞𝑖𝑞𝑔𝑞𝑏𝑞 + 0.5γ𝐵𝑁 γ 𝑠 γ 𝑑 γ 𝑖 γ 𝑔 γ 𝑏 γ

29
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr.
Toufigh
Chapter 3

Bearing capacity: Hansen (1970)

𝑞 𝑢 𝑙 𝑡 = 𝑐𝑁𝑐 𝑠𝑐 𝑑 𝑐 𝑖 𝑐 𝑔 𝑐 𝑏 𝑐 + 𝑞̅𝑁𝑞𝑠𝑞𝑑𝑞𝑖𝑞𝑔𝑞𝑏𝑞 + 0.5γ𝐵𝑁 γ 𝑠 γ 𝑑 γ 𝑖 γ 𝑔 γ 𝑏 γ

30
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr.
Toufigh
Chapter 3

Bearing capacity: Hansen (1970)

𝑞 𝑢 𝑙 𝑡 = 𝑐𝑁𝑐 𝑠𝑐 𝑑 𝑐 𝑖 𝑐 𝑔 𝑐 𝑏 𝑐 + 𝑞̅𝑁𝑞𝑠𝑞𝑑𝑞𝑖𝑞𝑔𝑞𝑏𝑞 + 0.5γ𝐵𝑁 γ 𝑠 γ 𝑑 γ 𝑖 γ 𝑔 γ 𝑏 γ

31
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr.
Toufigh
Chapter 3

Bearing capacity: Hansen (1970)

32
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 3

Example :
Compute the ultimate bearing capacity by both Hansen and Meyerhof
equations for the footing and soil parameters shown:

𝑳=𝟐𝒎

𝜸 = 𝟏𝟖 𝒌𝑵/𝒎𝟑
𝑫=𝟐𝒎
𝝓 = 𝟑𝟓°

𝒄=𝟎
𝑩=𝟐𝒎

33
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr.
Toufigh
Chapter 3
Solution:
Since c=0 , any factors with subscript c do not need computing.
All gi and bi factors are 1.00 so Hansen equation simplifies to:

𝒒𝒖𝒍𝒕 = 𝜸𝑫𝑵𝒒 𝒔𝒒 𝒅𝒒 + 𝟎. 𝟓𝜸𝑩𝑵𝜸 𝒔𝜸 𝒅𝜸

𝝓 = 𝟑𝟐° 𝑵𝒒 = 𝟐𝟑. 𝟐 𝑵𝜸 = 𝟐𝟎. 𝟖

𝒔𝒒(𝑯) = 𝟏 + 𝑩𝐬𝐢𝐧 𝝓 = 𝟏. 𝑳=𝟐𝒎

𝑳
𝟓𝟑 𝑩
𝜸 = 𝟏𝟖 𝒌𝑵/𝒎𝟑
𝒔𝜸(𝑯) = 𝟏 − 𝟎. 𝟒 = 𝟎. 𝟔 𝑫=𝟐𝒎
𝑳
𝑫 𝝓 = 𝟑𝟐°
𝒅𝒒 = 𝟏 + 𝟐 tan 𝝓 𝟏 − sin 𝝓 𝟐 =
𝑩 𝒄=𝟎
𝟏. 𝟑
𝒅𝜸 = 𝟏. 𝟎 𝑩=𝟐𝒎
34
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr.
Toufigh
Chapter 3
Solution:
With these values we obtain:

𝒒𝒖𝒍𝒕 = 𝟏𝟖 𝟐 𝟐𝟑. 𝟐 𝟏. + 𝟎. 𝟓 𝟏𝟖 𝟐 𝟐𝟎. 𝟖 𝟎. 𝟔 𝟏

𝟏. 𝟓𝟑 𝟑
= 𝟏𝟖𝟖𝟔
Meyerhof equations: 𝝓 = 𝟑𝟐° 𝑵𝒒 = 𝟐𝟑. 𝟐 𝑵𝜸 = 𝟐𝟐

𝝓
𝑲𝒑 = 𝐭𝐚𝐧𝟐 𝟒𝟓 + 𝟐 = 𝟑. 𝑳=𝟐𝒎
𝟐𝟓 𝑩
𝒔𝒒 = 𝒔𝜸 = 𝟏 + 𝟎. = 𝟏. 𝟑𝟓 𝜸 = 𝟏𝟖 𝒌𝑵/𝒎𝟑
𝒑 𝑫=𝟐𝒎
𝟏𝑲 𝑳 𝝓 = 𝟑𝟐°
𝑲𝒑 𝑫 = 𝟏. 𝟏𝟖
𝒅𝒒 = 𝒅𝜸 = 𝟏 + 𝟎. 𝟏 𝑩 𝒄=𝟎
𝑩=𝟐𝒎 35
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr.
Toufigh
Chapter 3
Solution:

Substitute into the Meyerhof equation (ignoring any c subscripts):

𝒒𝒖𝒍𝒕 = 𝜸𝑫𝑵𝒒 𝒔𝒒 𝒅𝒒 + 𝟎. 𝟓𝜸𝑩𝑵𝜸 𝒔𝜸 𝒅𝜸
= 𝟏𝟖 𝟐 𝟐𝟑. 𝟐 𝟏. 𝟑𝟓 𝟏. 𝟏𝟖 + 𝟎. 𝟓 𝟏𝟖 𝟐 𝟐𝟐 𝟏. 𝟑𝟓
𝟏. 𝟏𝟖
= 𝟏𝟗𝟔𝟏 𝐤𝐏𝐚

So:
𝟏𝟖𝟏𝟐 𝒌𝑷𝒂 𝑳=𝟐𝒎
𝒒𝒖𝒍𝒕 (𝑯𝒂𝒏𝒔𝒆𝒏) =
𝜸 = 𝟏𝟖 𝒌𝑵/𝒎𝟑
𝒒𝒖𝒍𝒕 (𝑴𝒆𝒚𝒆𝒓𝒉𝒐𝒇) = 𝟏𝟗𝟔𝟏 𝒌𝑷𝒂 𝑫=𝟐𝒎
𝝓 = 𝟑𝟐°

𝒄=𝟎
𝑩=𝟐𝒎
 FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Dr. Toufigh
Chapter 3

Safety Factor

q ultimate
qsafe =
SF

Net ultimate bearing capacity

Net stress Increase in soil =
SF

, q = γDf
q net(u) = q u − q

qu − q
qsafe(net) =
SF

SF for Shallow Foundations : 3−4