Kaduna Polytechnic

Department of Civil Engineering

CEC 407
FOUNDATION ENGINEERING
Prepared for: HIGHER NATIONAL DIPLOMA (HND)
Prepared by: Engr. M.S. Abubakar
Engr. A.D. Umar
Date: April 2019
 FOUNDATION DESIGN

STRESSES IN SOIL
1.1 Introduction
Accurate estimate of stress distribution in a soil mass is essential for calculations of elastic and
consolidation settlements, of the bearing capacity of soil for shallow and deep foundations design,
of lateral earth pressures for the design of earth-retaining structures, and of slope stability.
The in situ vertical stresses are the existing stresses in soil strata due to self- weight. The vertical
stress at a point located at a depth z below the ground surface is equal to the weight of the soil
above that point. When water is present within the soil strata, we need to distinguish between the
total vertical stress and the effective vertical stress (Figure 1).
The stress increase within a soil mass caused by various types of external loading can be calculated
based on the theory of elasticity. This stress increase is in excess of the in situ stress and has to be
calculated separately (Figure 1b).

Figure 1: Stresses in a semi-infinite mass

Soil is “an interparticulate medium”. A soil mass consists of a heterogeneous collection of solid
particles with voids in between. The solids are made up of grains of minerals or organic material.
The voids contain water and gas. In this chapter we assume that a soil located under the
groundwater table is fully saturated [i.e., all voids between the soil grains are filled with water (no
air)]. Also, we assume that the soil above the groundwater table is dry. When a total stress (σ) is
applied to a saturated soil, it is carried by the water in the pores as well as the soil grains. The stress

2
 FOUNDATION DESIGN

carried by soil grains is called effective stress and given the symbol (σl). The stress carried by the
water in the pores is termed pore water pressure and given the symbol u. the expression can be
simplified as;

σ = σ l+ u

This means that the effective stress can be calculated at any point below the ground surface by
subtracting the pore water pressure from the total pressure at that point

(i.e., σl = σ − u).

Note that the strength and compressibility of the soil depend on the effective stresses that exist
within the soil grains—this is the essence of the effective stress principle that was formulated by
Terzaghi (1936). The principle of effective stress is of fundamental importance in soil mechanics
because soil behavior is governed by it. In this section we discuss only vertical in situ stresses (σz
or qz).

1.2 Stress Distribution in Soil

According to elastic theory, constant ratios exist between stresses and strains. For the theory to be
applicable, the real requirement is not that the material necessarily be elastic, but there must be
constant ratios between stresses and the corresponding strains. Therefore, in non-elastic soil
masses, the elastic theory may be assumed to hold so long as the stresses induced in the soil mass
are relatively small. Since the stresses in the subsoil of a structure having adequate fact or of safety
against shear failure are relatively small in comparison with the ultimate strength of the material,
the soil may be assumed to behave elastically under such stresses.
When a load is applied to the soil surface, it increases the vertical stresses within the soil mass.
The increased stresses are greatest directly under the loaded area, but extend indefinitely in all
directions. The stress increase within a soil mass caused by various types of external loading can
be calculated based on the theory of elasticity. Solutions for various types of loading are presented.
They are all similar and differ only in the assumptions made to represent the elastic conditions of
the soil mass. The formulas that are most widely used are the Boussinesq and Westergaard
formulas, others may include Two is to one (2:1) method, Newmark’s Chart, Fadum’s curves etc.
These formulas were first developed for point loads acting at the surface. These formulas have
been integrated to give stresses below uniform strip loads and rectangular loads.

1.2.1 Stresses Caused by a Point Load (Boussinesq Solution)

A point load is a concentrated load that can be applied at the surface of a semi- infinite soil mass
as indicated in the Figure below. Boussinesq (1883) presented solutions for stresses within a semi-
infinite soil mass subjected to a vertical point load applied at the surface. A semi-infinite soil mass
is defined as an infinitely thick layer (in the z-direction) that is bounded by a horizontal plane at
the top (x–y plane).

3
 FOUNDATION DESIGN

A Boussinesq solution for a point load assumes that the soil mass is semi-infinite, homogeneous,
linearly elastic, and isotropic. For the case of a vertical point load Q applied at the origin of the
coordinate system, the vertical stress increase at any point (x,y,z) within the semi-infinite soil mass
can be simplified as;

Example 1: A concentrated load of 1000kN is applied at

the ground surface. Compute the vertical pressure (i) at a depth of 4m below the load, (ii) at a
distance of 3 m at the same depth. [Answers: (i) 30KN/m2
(ii) 9.8KN/m2]

1.2.2 Stresses Caused by a Line Load

A footing is usually placed in an excavation and often a fill is placed next to the footing. When
calculating the stress increase from one or more footing loads, the changes in effective stress from
the excavations and fills must be included.
By means of integrating the point load relation along a line, it can be thought of as a point load that
is applied repeatedly, in a uniform manner, along the y-axis as illustrated below (E.g. Rail line). A
relation for the stress imposed by a line load, P, can be determined as;

Example 2: Three parallel strip footings (A, B &C) 3m

wide each and 5m apart center to center transmit contact pressures of 200, 150 and 100kN/m
respectively. Calculate the vertical stress due to the combined loads beneath the centers of each
footing at a depth of 3m below the base. Assume the footings are placed at a depth of 2m below the
ground surface. [Answers: (@A) 45KN/m2 (@B) 36.3KN/m2 (@C) 23.74KN/m2]

4
 FOUNDATION DESIGN

1.2.3 Stresses Under the Center of a Uniformly Loaded Circular Area

For a uniformly loaded circular area (Figure below), the stress increase under the center of the
loaded area at any depth z is given by

Where
P or q = (force/unit area) is the applied
pressure,
R = the radius of the loaded circle, and
z = the depth below the center of the loaded
circle at which the stress increase is calculated.
Example 3: A pressure of 10 kN/m2 is uniformly
distributed on a circular area with R = 0.5 m. Calculate the increase in vertical stress directly
under the center of the applied load for z = 5 m.

1.2.4 Stresses Caused by a Strip Load (B/L ≈ 0)

Theoretically, a strip foundation is a rectangle of infinite length L and finite width B (i.e., B/L ≈ 0).
But foundations with L/B > 10 can be regarded as strip
foundations. Examples of strip foundations include
foundations for long structures such as retaining walls. A
strip load can be thought of as a line load that is applied
repeatedly and uniformly along the y-axis covering a
width B as illustrated (Figure below). This is a plane
strain geometry in which the stresses in the x–z plane are
independent of y. The units of a strip load are given as
force per unit area, such as kN/m2.
The vertical stress increase at any point (x,z) is given as:

Where
q = is the applied pressure,
B = the width of the strip load,
x & z = the coordinates of the point at which the stress increase is calculated.

5
 FOUNDATION DESIGN

Example 4: A 1-m-wide strip load of 10 kN/m2 is applied at the surface of a semi-infinite soil
mass. Calculate the increase in vertical stress directly under the center of the applied load for z =
8 m.

1.2.5 Stresses Caused by a Uniformly Loaded Rectangular Area

Squares and rectangles are the most common shapes used in shallow foundations. The role of a
shallow foundation is to spread the column load (from a super- structure) on a wider area in a
uniform manner. Thus, instead of applying the concentrated column load directly to the “weak”
soil, the shallow foundation will apply a much gentler uniform pressure to the soil.
Consider a uniformly loaded rectangular area with length L and width B (Note that L > B in a
rectangle, and L = B in a square. The uniform load q is expressed in force per unit area (pressure
units). Newmark (1935) integrated Boussinesq's equation over a finite area and obtained a relation
for the stress under the corner of a uniformly loaded rectangular area, for example, a footing.

Where m = B/z and n = L/z

Alternatively, the Fadum’s chart can be used to determine the vertical stress using;

Ir is found from m = B/z and n = L/z using Fadum’s Chart or expression below (L & B are
interchangeable) which are from integration of Boussinesq’s equation.

6
 FOUNDATION DESIGN

Example 5: Calculate the increase in vertical stress under the center of a 4 m × 2 m rectangle that
is loaded uniformly with q = 10 kN/m2. Assume that the soil layer underlying the loaded area is
thick and linear elastic with E = 1 × 107 kPa, ν = 0.3 and z = 5m.
Notice that Newmark’s equation provides the stress in only one point; for stresses at other points,
for example when determining the vertical distribution at several depths below the corner point,
the calculations have to be performed for each depth. To determine the stress below a point other
than the corner point, the area has to be split in several parts, all with a corner at the point in
question and the results of multiple calculations summed up to give the answer. Indeed, the
relations are rather cumbersome to use.
Also restricting the usefulness in engineering practice of the footing relation is that an irregularly
shaped area has to be broken up in several smaller rectangular areas. Recognizing this, Newmark
(1942) published diagrams called influence charts by which the time and effort necessary for the
7
 FOUNDATION DESIGN

calculation of the stress below a point was considerably shortened even for an area with an
irregularly shaped footprint.
Until the advent of the computer and spread-sheet programs, the influence chart was faster to use
than the equation, and the Newmark charts became an indispensable tool for all geotechnical
engineers. This is given as:

Drawing Procedure
1 Take (Δσz/q) between 0 and 1 with increment of 0.1 (or other increment value), then find
(R/z) value. 
2 Determine the scale of depth and length. (Example: 2.5cm= 6 = depth z) 
3 Calculate the radius R of each circle by (R/z) value multiplied with depth z 
4 Draw the circles with radius (scaled value) at step 3 by considering the scale at step
2. Example: depth of point z = 6m

5  Line AB is the depth scale. 

6 Influence value = 1 block/total number of included blocks within the boundary of the drawn
chart. (Example: 1/(20 slices*10 blocks per slice) = 1/200 = 0.005)
7 Thus,  
Δσz = I.N.q
where  Δσz = vertical stress increase at any depth z measured from the foundation baseline 
I = influence value
N= total number of loaded blocks q = (net) uniform pressure

8
 FOUNDATION DESIGN

1.2.6 Stress Isober or Pressure Bulb Concept

An isobar is a stress contour or a line which connects all points below the ground surface at which
the vertical pressure is the same in fact an isobar is a spatial curved, surface and resembles a bulb
in shape, this is because the vertical pressure at all points in a horizontal plane at equal radial
distances from the load is the same. Thus, the stress isobar is also called the bulb of pressure or
simply the pressure bulb. The vertical pressure at each point on the pressure bulb is the same.
Pressure at points inside the bulb are greater than that at a point on the surface of the bulb and
pressures at points outside the bulb are smaller than that value. The pressure bulb concept gives the
user a feel for the spread of the stresses through a soil mass. According to linear elastic theory, the
size of the pressure bulb is proportional to the size of the loaded area. This is a key concept in
geotechnical engineering that is used to evaluate the depth of significant influence, (DOSI)
denoted by DS of an applied surface load. The depth D S is a finite depth below which there are no
significant strains in the soil mass due to the loads imposed at the surface. Typically, strains are not
significant once the stresses have attenuated to a value of 10 to 15% of those at the surface. For
example, the Figure (a) below shows that for “infinitely long” strip footings, DS = 4 to 6B, while
for square footings, Figure (b) shows that D S = 1.5 to 2B. The depths corresponding to this 10 to
15% criterion can be used to determine the minimum depth of field exploration for proposed strip
or square footings to ensure that the anticipated significant depth is explored.

9
FOUNDATION DESIGN

10
 FOUNDATION DESIGN

Principal of Foundation Design

2.1 Foundation safety criteria
It is a statement of the obvious that the function of a foundation is to transfer the load from the
structure to the ground (i.e. soil) supporting it – and it must do this safely, for if it does not then the
foundation will fail in bearing and/or settlement, and seriously affect the structure which may also
fail.
(1) Bearing capacity. When the shear stress within the soil, due to the structure’s loading, exceeds
the shear strength of the soil, catastrophic collapse of the sup- porting soil can occur. Before
ultimate collapse of the soil occurs there can be large deformations within it which may lead to
unacceptable differential movement or settlement of, and damage to, the structure. (In some
situations however, collapse can occur with little or no advance warning!)
(2) Settlement. Practically all materials contract under compressive loading and distort under shear
loading – soils are no exception. Provided that the settlement is either acceptable (i.e. will not
cause structural damage or undue cracking, will not damage services, and will be visually
acceptable and free from practical problems of door sticking, etc.) or can be catered for in the
structural design (e.g. by using three-pinned arches which can accommodate settlement), there is
not necessarily a foundation design problem. Problems will occur when the settlement is
significantly excessive or differential.
Good design must not only be safe but must aim to save construction costs, time and materials.
The following procedures should help to achieve this and an ‘educated’ client will recognize the
importance of funding this work with a realistic fee.
1. On the building plan, the position of columns and load- bearing walls should be marked, and
any other induced loadings and bending moments. The loads should be classified into dead,
imposed and wind loadings, giving the appropriate partial safety factors for these loads.
2. From a study of the site ground investigation (if available), the strength of the soil at various
depths or strata below foundation level should be studied, to determine the safe bearing
capacity at various levels. These values – or presumed bearing values from BS 8004 in the
absence of a site investigation – are used to estimate the allowable bearing pressure.
3. The invert level (underside) of the foundation is determined by either the minimum depth below
ground level unaffected by temperature, moisture content variation or erosion – this can be as
low as 450mm in granular soils but, depending on the site and ground conditions, can exceed
1 m – or by the depth of basement, boiler house, service ducts or similar.
4. The foundation area required is determined from the characteristic (working) loads and
estimated allowable pressure. This determines the preliminary design of the types or
combination of types of foundation. The selection is usually based on economics, speed and
buildability of construction.
5. The variation with depth of the vertical stress is determined, to check for possible over-stressing
of any underlying weak strata.

11
 FOUNDATION DESIGN

6. Settlement calculations should be carried out to check that the total and differential settlements
are acceptable. If these are unacceptable then a revised allowable bearing pressure should be
determined, and the foundation design amended to increase its area, or the foundations should
be taken down to a deeper and stronger stratum.
7. Before finalizing the choice of foundation type, the preliminary costing of alternative
superstructure designs should be made, to determine the economics of increasing
superstructure costs in order to reduce foundation costs.
8. Alternative safe designs should be checked for economy, speed and simplicity of construction.
Speed and economy can conflict in foundation construction – an initial low-cost solution may
increase the construction period. Time is often of the essence for a client needing early return
on capital investment. A fast-track programme for superstructure construction can be negated
by slow foundation construction.
9. The design office should be prepared to amend the design, if excavation shows variation in
ground conditions from those predicted from the site soil survey and investigation.

12
 FOUNDATION DESIGN

2.2 Foundation Selection

The selection of the appropriate foundation solution is perhaps the most important part of the
design process and most difficult to define. The engineer should not confuse structural calculation
and analysis with design. Calculation usually involves analysing, from certain parameters, the
forces and stresses involved in a particular structural element. Structural design is the process of
exploiting engineering knowledge in an attempt to produce the most suitable and economic
structure. The foundation selection is governed by many factors, which include:
 sub-soil conditions,
 past site usage,
 adjacent construction,
 size/scale of development proposals,
 timescale/cost limitations.
While this is not a comprehensive list it can be appreciated that the sub- soil or any one factor is
only part of the overall equation.
Foundation selection to suit bearing strata strength and depth

Sub-soil conditions Sub-soil conditions

Condition 1 Strips/Pads/Rafts
Suitable bearing strata within 1.5 m of ground When loading on pads is relatively large and pad sizes
surface tend to join up or the foundation needs to be balanced
or connected then continuous beam foundations are
appropriate.
Strip foundations are usually considered the norm for
these conditions but rafts can prove more economical in
some cases.
Condition 2 Strips/Pads/Rafts on improved ground using vibro or
Suitable bearing strata at 1.25 m and greater dynamic consolidation techniques
below ground surface
Condition 3 As Condition 2 plus the following
Suitable bearing strata at 1.5 m and greater Piles and ground beams
below ground surface Pier and ground beams
Piles and raft
Condition 4 As Condition 2 plus the following
Low bearing pressure for considerable depth Buoyant rafts
Condition 5 As Condition 2 plus the following
Low bearing pressure near surface Rafts
Ground improvement using preloading to support
reinforced strips on rafts

13
 FOUNDATION DESIGN

2.3 Shallow Foundations

Shallow foundations are structural members that convert the concentrated super- structural loads
into pressures applied to the supporting soil. Square, circular, strip, and mat foundations are
common shapes of shallow foundations. Each of these shapes are suitable for a specific type of
structure: A square foundation is used under a column, a circular foundation is used for cylindrical
structures such as water tanks, a strip foundation is used under retaining walls, and a mat (raft)
foundation is used under an entire building.
A foundation is considered shallow if Df ≤ B as proposed by Terzaghi (1943), where B is the
foundation width and Df is the foundation depth. Others proposed that foundations with greater
depths (up to 4B) could be considered shallow foundations.
When designing a shallow foundation, two aspects must be considered:
 The applied foundation pressure should not exceed the bearing capacity of the supporting
soil; and
 The foundation settlement should not be excessive due to the applied foundation pressure.
There are three possible modes of soil failure, depending on soil type and foundation size and
depth. The first mode, general shear failure, is usually encountered in dense sands and stiff clays
underlying a shallow foundation. The general shear failure mode is accompanied by the occurrence
of a failure surface and the inability to maintain the applied pressure. There is a distinctive peak in
the pressure versus settlement curve, which corresponds to the ultimate bearing capacity, qu.

The second failure mode, local shear failure, is encountered in medium-dense sands and medium-
stiff clays. It is characterized by the lack of a distinct peak in the pressure versus settlement curve,
In the case of local shear failure, determination of the ultimate bearing capacity is usually
governed by excessive foundation settlements. The local shear failure mode is accompanied by a
progressive failure surface that may extend to the ground surface after qu is reached.

The third mode of failure, punching shear failure, usually occurs in loose sands and soft clays.
This type of failure is accompanied by a triangular failure surface directly under the foundation. As
in local shear failure, punching failure is also characterized by the lack of a distinctive ultimate
bearing capacity. Thus, the ultimate bearing capacity in this case is taken as the pressure
corresponding to excessive foundation settlements.

2.2.1 Terzaghi’s Bearing Capacity Equations

The bearing capacity of a soil is its ability to carry loads without failing in shear. There are four
major methods to predict failure. Karl Terzaghi developed the fist method in 1943. Field tests in
Canada by Meyerhof (1963) lead to modification factors. Finally, Brinch Hansen in Denmark
(1970) and Vesic in the USA modified these factors to a greater refinement.

14
 FOUNDATION DESIGN

Terzaghi’s bearing capacity equation for shallow foundations was derived for a continuous (strip)
foundation with general shear failure. The supporting material was assumed to be a thick layer of a
homogeneous soil. A continuous foundation is a foundation with a finite width B and infinite
length L; thus, B/L ≈ 0.
The figure above shows the assumed failure surface underlying the foundation. There are three
distinct failure zones of soil under the footing: a triangular zone, DEH, immediately under the
footing; two radial zones, DHG and EIH; and two Rankine passive zones, DGC and EFI. The soil
above the foundation level, having a thickness of Df , is replaced by an overburden pressure of q =
γDf to simplify the equilibrium analysis. Note that the angle α is assumed to be equal to the soil
angle of internal friction φl and that the soil shear resistance along CA and FB is neglected. In his
limit equilibrium analysis, Terzaghi assumed that the bearing capacity of the foundation is the
pressure of the foundation that will cause the triangular zone to be in a downward impending
motion condition. For that to happen, the triangular zone will push the radial shear zones to the left
and right away from the footing, and in turn, the radial shear zones will push the Rankine passive
zones upward. The impending motion condition is assumed to take place in all zones
simultaneously. Based on this assumption, Terzaghi derived the following equation for a strip
foundation and general shear failure:

Where cl is the cohesion intercept of soil, q the overburden pressure at foundation depth (q = γDf ),
γ the unit weight of soil, B the foundation width, and Nc , Nq , and Nγ are non-dimensional
bearing capacity factors that are functions of soil friction angle φl. The bearing capacity factors Nc,
Nq, and Nγ are given by

The Equation can be modified to estimate the bearing capacity for a square foundation:

15
 FOUNDATION DESIGN

Example 6: Bearing Capacity of a Strip Foundation. Using Terzaghi’s equation, calculate the
bearing capacity of a 0.6-m-wide strip foundation on a thick homogeneous layer of Ottawa sand
with cl = 0 and φl = 37◦. The foundation is situated at a depth = 0.38 m. The unit weight of Ottawa
sand is 18.14 kN/m3
[Ans: 586 kN/m2]
Example 7: Bearing Capacity of a Square Foundation. Using Terzaghi’s equation, calculate the
bearing capacity of a 3 m × 3 m foundation on a 12-m-thick homogeneous layer of sand (c l = 0
and φl = 37◦) underlain by bedrock. The foundation is situated at a depth Df = 0.38 m. The unit
weight of soil is 18.14 kN/m3.
[Ans: 1474 kN/m2]
Exercise
Using Terzaghi’s equation, calculate the bearing capacity of a 2.0-m-wide strip foundation on a
thick homogeneous layer of sand with c l = 0 and φl = 37◦. The foundation is situated at a depth of
2m. The unit weight of the sand is 18.14 kN/m3. The groundwater table is very deep.
Using Terzaghi’s equation calculate the bearing capacity of a 2 m × 4 m foundation on a 30-m-
thick homogeneous layer of sand, with cl = 0 and φl = 37◦, underlain by bedrock. The foundation is
situated at a depth Df = 2 m. The unit weight of the sand is 19 kN/m3. The groundwater table is
very deep.

2.2.2 Meyerhof’s General Bearing Capacity Equation

Meyerhof (1963) developed a generalized bearing capacity equation that includes correction
factors for foundation depth, foundation shape, and for inclined loads:

16
 FOUNDATION DESIGN

Example 8: Bearing
Capacity of a Strip Footing with Inclined Load. Using Meyerhof’s equation, calculate the bearing
capacity of a 2-m-wide strip foundation on a 14.5m thick homogeneous layer of sand (c l = 0 and φl
= 37◦) underlain by bedrock. The foundation is subjected to an inclined load making a 15◦ angle

17
 FOUNDATION DESIGN

with the vertical as shown in Figure 6.18. The foundation is situated at a depth Df = 0.5 m. The unit
weight of soil is 19 kN/m3.

Exercise
Use Meyerhof’s equation to calculate the bearing capacity of a 2 m × 4 m foundation on a 30-
◦
m-thick homogeneous layer of sand, with cl = 0 and φl = 37 , underlain by bedrock. The
18
 FOUNDATION DESIGN

foundation is situated at a depth Df = 2 m. The unit weight of the sand is 19 kN/m 3. The
groundwater table is very deep.
Use Meyerhof’s equation to calculate the bearing capacity of a 2-m-wide strip foundation on a
◦
20-m-thick homogeneous layer of sandy silt, with cl = 20 kPa and φl = 30 , underlain by
bedrock. The foundation is situated at a depth Df = 1 m and subjected to an inclined loading
◦
making 20 angle with the vertical. The unit weight of the sand is 18 kN/m 3. The groundwater
table is very deep.

2.2.3 Effects of the Water Table Level on Bearing Capacity

Both Terzaghi’s equation and Meyerhof’s equation need to be adjusted when the water table level is
close to the foundation. There are three cases to be considered: Case 1 is when the water table level
is above the foundation level, case 2 is when the water table level is between the foundation level
and a distance B (= width of foundation) below the foundation level, and case 3 is when the water
level is lower than a distance B below the foundation level. The three cases are illustrated in the
Figure below.

For case 1, two adjustments need to be made, First, the surcharge q = γDf in the second term of both
equations needs to be replaced by the effective surcharge q = X 1γ + X2(γsat − γw), where X1 and X2
are as defined in Figure (a). Second, the unit weight of soil, γ, needs to be replaced by γl= γsat − γw in
the third term of both equations.
For case 2 we need to make only one adjustment, The unit weight of soil, γ, in the third term of both
equations needs to be replaced by γ = γl+ (X1/B)(γ − γl), where γl = γsat − γw. The distance X1 is
defined in Figure (b).
For case 3 (Figure c) we do not need to make any adjustments. In this case the water table is too
deep to have an effect on the bearing capacity.
3.0 DESIGN AND DETAILING OF RETAINING WALLS

Definition: Retaining walls are usually built to hold back soil mass. However, retaining walls can
also be constructed for aesthetic landscaping purposes. Retaining walls are structures that are
constructed to retail soil or any such materials which are unable to stand vertically by themselves.

19
 FOUNDATION DESIGN

They are also provided to maintain the grounds at two different levels.

The following are the different types of retaining walls, which is based on the shape and the mode
of resisting the pressure.
• Gravity wall-Masonry or Plain concrete
• Cantilever retaining wall-RCC (Inverted T and L)
• Counterfort retaining wall-RCC
• Buttress wall-RCC

3.1 Earth Pressures

Earth pressure is the pressure exerted by the retaining material on the retaining wall. This pressure
tends to deflect the wall outward. There are two types of earth pressure and they are;
Active earth pressure or earth pressure (Pa) and Passive earth pressure (Pp). Active earth pressure
tends to deflect the wall away from the backfill. Earth pressure depends on type of backfill, the
height of wall and the soil conditions
Soil conditions: The different soil conditions are
 Dry leveled back fill
 Moist leveled backfill
 Submerged leveled backfill
 Leveled backfill with uniform surcharge
 Backfill with sloping surface
3.1.1 Analysis for dry back fills

 Maximum pressure at any height, p=kah

 Total pressure at any height from top, P=1/2[kah]h =
[kah2]/2
 Bending moment at any height = M=Pxh/3

20
 FOUNDATION DESIGN

= [kah3]/6

Total pressure at bottom, Pa = [kaH2]/2

Total Bending moment at bottom, M = [kaH3]/6

Where, k = Coefficient of active earth pressure= (1-sin)/(1+sin)=tan2

= 1/kp, coefficient of passive earth pressure
= Angle of internal friction or angle of repose
=Unit weigh or density of backfill
If = 30, ka=1/3 and kp=3.

3.1.2 Backfill with sloping surface

pa= kaH at the bottom and is parallel to

inclined surface of backfill

k a=cosθ ¿

where θ = angle of surchage

Total pressure at bottom=Pa = kaH2/2

3.1.3 Stability requirements:

Following conditions must be satisfied for stability of wall.
• It should not overturn
• It should not slide
• It should not subside i.e Max. pressure at the toe should not exceed the safe bearing capacity
of the soil under working condition
Check against overturning
Factor of safety against overturning = MR / MO 1.55 (=1.4/0.9)
Where, MR =Stabilising moment or restoring moment
MO =overturning moment

Check against Sliding

FOS = Resisting force to sliding/Horizontal force causing sliding = W/Pa 1.55 (=1.4/0.9)

21
 FOUNDATION DESIGN

Design of Shear key:

If the wall is not safe against sliding, then a shear key is to be provided. It is provided either below
the stem or at the end of heel. It should not be provided at the end of toe. If shear key is provided,
then it should be designed taking the effect of passive pressure.

In case the wall is unsafe against sliding

2
Pp = Ptan (45 +/2) = P kp

where pp= Unit passive pressure on soil above shearing plane AB,
If W= Total vertical force acting at the key base
= shearing angle of passive resistance
R= Total passive force = pp x a
PA=Active horizontal pressure at key base for H+a
W=Total frictional force under flat base
For equilibrium, R + W =FOS x PA
FOS= (R + W)/ PA 1.55
3.1.4 Pressure below the wall
Consider the retaining wall as shown. All forces acting on the wall are shown. The moment of all
forces at the end of toe is considered and the requirements of stability are to be established. For
stability earth pressure at the end of the heel for the entire height of wall should be considered. The
maximum and minimum pressure below the wall can be determined from the principles of static.

22
 FOUNDATION DESIGN

Maximum pressure at the toe

Let the resultant R due to W and Pa lie at a distance x from the toe.
X = M/W, M = sum of all moments about toe.
Eccentricity of the load = e = (b/2-x)
Minimum pressure at heel
∑W
Pmin =
b [ 1−
6e
b ]
This should not be less than zero to avoid tension at the base. From this e=b/6, resultant should cut
the base within the middle third. Otherwise the wall tends to separate from the base due to tension.
Maximum pressure at toe
∑W
Pmax =
b [ 1+
6e
b ]
This should not be greater than SBC of soil to avoid the subsidence of wall.
Depth of foundation

[ ]
2
SBC 1−sin ∅ SBC 2
Rankine’s formula: Df = = Ka
γ 1+sin ∅ γ
3.1.5 Preliminary Proportioning (T shaped wall)
Following guidelines are to be followed for initial proportioning of wall with out surcharge. For
surcharge and other cases, good textbooks should be followed.
 Stem: Top width 200 mm to 400 mm
23
 FOUNDATION DESIGN

 Base slab width b= 0.4H to 0.6H, and 0.6H to 0.75H for surcharged wall
 Base slab thickness= H/10 to H/14
 Toe projection= (1/3-1/4) Base width

Behaviour or structural action and design

All the three elements namely stem, toe and heel acts as cantilever slabs and hence the design and
detailing principles are same as that of conventional cantilever slabs.
3
 Stem design: Mu =partial safety factor x (kaH /6)
 Determine the depth d from Mu = Mu, lim=Qbd2
 Determine the steel based on balanced or under reinforced design. Provide enough
development length at the junction for all bars.
Curtailment of steel
Maximum steel is needed at the base where the BM is maximum. As the BM decreases towards
the top, steel can be suitably curtailed at one or two levels. Usually steel is curtailed at one level
where the steel quantity is about 50% or 67% of the base steel.
 Effective depth is Proportional to h
 Bending moment is proportional to h3
l l 2
 Ast is α to BM/Eff. depth and is α to h

24
 FOUNDATION DESIGN

 Distribution steel: 0.12% Gross area for HYSD bars, 0.15% for Mild steel bars
 Temperature steel: Provide this steel at the outer face which is same as the distribution
steel.
 Also provide suitable development lengths for all steel meeting at the junction. Provide
suitable construction keys, drainage facilities, tile drains and weep holes as shown in the
drawing. Sketch the drawings and detail as per the requirements.

25
 FOUNDATION DESIGN

ASSIGNMENT

Submit on Monday the 17th of June 2019 by 2PM.

1. Design a cantilever retaining wall (T type) to retain earth for a height of 4m. The backfill is
horizontal. The density of soil is 18kN/m. Safe bearing capacity of soil is 200kN/m. Take the
co-efficient of friction between concrete and soil as 0.6. The angle of repose is 30 degrees. Use
M20 concrete and Fe415 steel.

Hint:

 Calculate, H= h' +Df and determine the Preliminary proportioning

 Behaviour or structural action and design
 Curtailment of steel
 Stability analysis
 Design of heal and Toe
 Drainage
 Sketch

2. A retaining wall with dimensions as shown in figure A below, has been constructed on an
existing ground. The area behind and in front of the wall was then backfilled with a coarse-
grained soil having a total density, ρt, of 1,750 kg/m3 and an internal friction angle, φ', of 32°.
Cohesion, c', can be assumed to be 0. There is no water table and the backfill is free-draining.
Calculate the active and passive earth stresses acting on the wall and where the resultant to all
forces cuts the base of the footing. (Assume that the thickness of the wall and its footing is
small).

Figure A: Vertical view of retaining wall Figure B: Forces and stresses affecting the wall

Note: In any analysis of a foundation case, a

free-body diagram is necessary to ensure that all forces are accounted for in the analysis, such as
shown in Fig. B.)

Also, The vertical forces denoted #1 and #2 are loads on the base (heel portion). #1 is from the
26
 FOUNDATION DESIGN

surcharge on the ground surface calculated over a width equal to the length of the heel. #2 is the
weight of the soil on the heel. The two horizontal forces denoted #4 and #5 are the active earth
stress forces acting on a fictitious wall rising from the heel, which wall is the boundary of the free
body. #3 is passive earth stress in front of the wall (normally neglected in practice because in
many projects a more or less narrow trench for burying pipes and other conduits is often dug in
front of the wall. This, of course, eliminates the passive earth stress, albeit temporarily.

27
 FOUNDATION DESIGN

Solution to Q2.

In general, seven gravity forces, loads, and earth stresses affect the wall as indicated in Figure B.
They can be combined to show a single force, the resultant. The governing condition is the location
of the resultant. To determine this, calculate the rotational moment around the footing toe (left edge
of the footing in Figure A).

Also, Ka = tan2 [45-(32/2)] = 0.31 and Kp = tan2 [45+(32/2)] = 3.25.

Moments around the footing toe

Vertical: Q=(30+262+35) = 327; M=(67.5+590.6+18) = 676 ==> Voff toe = 676/327 = 2.1 m

Horizontal: Q=(22+98-114) = 6; M=(67+195-76) = 186 ==> habove = 186/6 = 31.0 m

Therefore, X/31 = 6/327 ==> X = 0.6 m well within the middle third.

28