Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Southern Illinois University, Carbondale on 06/06/15. Copyright ASCE.

For personal use only; all rights reserved.

BEARING CAPACITY OF STRIP FOOTING

ABOVE VOID
By R. L. Baus, 1 A. M. ASCE and M. C. Wang, 2 M. ASCE

ABSTRACT: The bearing capacity behavior of strip footing located above a con-
tinuous void in silty clay soil was investigated experimentally and analytically.
The experiment was performed in a test tank which contained a compacted
silty clay. The analysis was made by using the finite element method in which
the test soil was treated as an elastic perfectly plastic material. Results of the
study indicate that the bearing capacity of footing above a void can be analyzed
successfully by using the finite element method of analysis. For each footing,
there exists a critical depth below which the presence of the void has negligible
influence on the footing performance. When the void is located above the crit-
ical depth, the bearing capacity of the footing varies with various factors, such
as the size and location of the void and the depth of foundation. Graphs re-
lating the bearing capacity with the influencing factors investigated are devel-
oped. These graphs provide a data base useful for design of continuous footing
centered with an underground void.

INTRODUCTION

Voids occur under structures with sufficient frequency to warrant spe-

cial attention, since voids may cause structural damage and loss of life.
Voids may occur as a result of mining, tunneling, or solution cavity in
a soluble rock. Solution cavities may exist at any depth in the soluble
bedrock; there are instances in which soluble bedrock dissolves away at
the soil-bedrock interface leaving the overburden soil bridging across the
void. Mining operations have left countless number of underground
voids. With population growth and the resulting extension of the urban
sprawl to the areas of prior mining activity, there is growing concern to
the geotechnical engineer regarding foundation stability. Similar concern
also arises regarding the stability of foundations above soft ground tun-
nels because of the increasing demand of transportation tunnels in the
urban and suburban areas.
When faced with the design of foundations above a void, the geo-
technical engineer generally may consider various alternatives such as:
(1) To fill the void with acceptable materials; (2) to use piles or caissons
to bridge the void and to bear on soil or rock below the void; (3) to
excavate and found the foundation below the bottom of the void; and
'Asst. Prof., Coll. of Engrg., Univ. of South Carolina, Columbia, S.C. 29208.
2
Assoc. Prof., Dept. of Civ. Engrg., Pennsylvania State Univ., University Park,
Penn. 16802.
Note.—Discussion open until June 1, 1983. To extend the closing date one
month, a written request must be filed with the ASCE Manager of Technical and
Professional Publications. The manuscript for this paper was submitted for re-
view and possible publication on March 4, 1982. This paper is part of the Journal
of Geotechnical Engineering, Vol. 109, No. 1, January, 1983. ©ASCE, ISSN 0733-
9410/83/0001-0001/$01.00. Proc. No. 17603.
1

J. Geotech. Engrg. 1983.109:1-14.

 (4) to relocate the foundation away from the void. Of these alternatives,
relocation is practicable only if sufficient space is available. Other alter-
natives are expensive and also are infeasible for the condition with tun-
nels. To design a stable foundation system above a tunnel, it requires
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Southern Illinois University, Carbondale on 06/06/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

a method of stability analysis for foundation above a void. Such a

method is also essential for the economic design of foundations above
other types of void.
Studies on the stability of foundations above voids are scarce in the
available literature; only few investigations related with this subject mat-
ter are available. One of the earliest studies is Terzaghi's investigation
on soil arching (9,10). Terzaghi considered the static equilibrium of the
soil mass above a yielding horizontal trap-door and found the vertical
pressure acting on the yielding trap-door to be dependent on the width
and depth (measured from the ground surface) of the trap-door and the
unit weight and strength property of the overburden soil.
Atkinson and Cairncross (2) studied the stability of shallow circular
tunnels in a weightless Mohr-Coulomb material. The tunnels were sup-
ported by a uniform internal pressure with a uniform surcharge of in-
finite extent acting on the ground surface. Two methods of analysis were
adopted to determine the collapse load: one method based on the lower
bound plasticity theorem and the other based on the limit equilibrium.
The required collapse load was given in terms of the tunnel size, the
depth of the tunnel measured from the ground surface, and the strength
property of surrounding soil.
Later, Atkinson, et al. (1) extended their earlier study to include two
stages of collapse—initial and final—by gradually reducing in steps the
internal tunnel pressure. They found that the mechanism of initial col-
lapse is different from that of final collapse. The required load for initial
collapse was determined by using the upper bound plasticity theorem,
while the final collapse load was obtained by using the lower bound
theorem.
The preceding review has indicated a need to develop a method of
stability analysis for foundations located above a void. An essential ele-
ment required in the development is the foundation's bearing capacity
and settlement behavior. The results of a study on settlement behavior
has been reported elsewhere (11); this paper presents the bearing ca-
pacity behavior of shallow continuous footing situated above a void. As
a pilot study on this subject matter, this research is limited to footings
which are centered with continuous voids of regular shape and are sub-
jected to vertical central loading.

EXPERIMENTAL STUDY

The purpose of the experimental study was to provide test data for
better understanding of the footing displacement behavior and failure
mechanism and for validation of the results of theoretical analysis. The
experimental study consisted of model footing tests and determinations
of strength property of the test soil.
Test Soil.—The test soil was a light yellow silty clay abundantly avail-
able at the state college area. The test soil contained about 10% sand,
2

J. Geotech. Engrg. 1983.109:1-14.

 55% silt, and 35% clay, and had 37% liquid limit, 19% plastic limit, and
2.67 specific gravity. According to the Unified Soil Classification System,
the soil was classified as CL. Under standard Proctor compactive effort,
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Southern Illinois University, Carbondale on 06/06/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

the optimum moisture content was about 18% with the maximum dry
density of 111 pcf (1,778 kg/m 3 ). For easy mixing and compaction, the
test soil was compacted to a water content of 17% and a dry density of
100 pcf (1,602 kg/m 3 ), which was equivalent to 90% compaction.
Strength Property of Test Soil.—The stress-strain and strength be-
haviors of the compacted soil in compression were determined by using
the triaxial compression tests. The test specimens had a length of 2.82
in. (71.5 mm) and a diameter of 1.40 in. (35.6 mm). The deformation
rate was 0.05 in. /min (1.3 mm/min). Because of highly nonlinear stress-
strain behavior, the deformation moduli in compression were obtained
by using the method proposed by Simons (8). According to this method,
the compression modulus was equal to the ratio of one-half of the axial
stress at failure to the failure axial strain.
The stress-strain and strength behaviors in tension were determined
by using diametral compression (indirect tension) tests. Test specimens
were 4 in. (102 mm) diam with 4.5 in. (114 mm) in length. Loads were
applied at a deformation rate of 0.05 in. /min (1.3 mm/min). The vertical
loads and horizontal diametral deformation were monitored using an
electronic load cell and a linear potentiometer, respectively. The mod-
ulus in tension was obtained from the slope of the initial portion of the
stress-strain curve.
The strengths and moduli in both compression and tension are sum-
marized in Table 1. Included in Table 1 also are Poisson's ratio, the initial
earth pressure coefficient (i.e., the ratio of horizontal to vertical earth
pressure), and wet density of the test soil. The Poisson's ratio and initial
earth pressure coefficient values are estimated from the available liter-
ature (4,12). The strength, modulus, Poisson's ratio, pressure coefficient,
and density of the model footing material (steel plate) are also tabulated
in Table 1. These values are needed in the theoretical analysis which is
described in later sections.
Model Footing Test.—Model footings were tested in a plexiglass-sided
test tank which was approximately 4 ft (1.2 m) high, 5.5 ft (1.7 m) long,
and 5.5 in. (140 mm) wide. The tank was constructed of plywood and
plexiglass heavily reinforced with 3 in. (76 mm) steel channels. The
model footings were 0.5 in. (13 mm) thick steel plates of three different
widths: 2 in. (51 mm), 3 in. (76 mm), and 5 in. (127 mm). The model
footings were welded to the loading device to minimize possible rotation
during testing.
The test soil was compacted in 3 in. (76 mm) layers to the prescribed
density using a steel loading head which covered the entire length and
width of the test tank. A thin line of lightly colored sand was placed
between layers along the transparent plexiglass side to aid in viewing
the slip line fields. Voids of various widths were centered under the test
footing at the bottom of the tank. The voids were formed by placing a
removable, lubricated wooden block at the bottom of the test tank. Void
widths tested were 1 in. (25 mm), 6 in. (152 mm), 12 in. (305 mm), 23
in. (584 mm), and no-void condition. Fig. 1 shows a view of the com-
pacted soil with thin lines of colored sand and a rectangular void.

J. Geotech. Engrg. 1983.109:1-14.

 TABLE 1.—Material Properties of Test Soil and Model Footing Material (Steel
Plate)
Test soil Steel plate
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Southern Illinois University, Carbondale on 06/06/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

(1) (2) (3)

Angle of Internal Friction,
in degrees 13.5 0
Unit Cohesion, in pounds
per square foot (kilo-
newtons per square
meter) 1,370 (65.6) .2.6 x 106 (1.24 x 105)
Modulus in Compression,
in pounds per square
foot (kilonewtons per
square meter) 97,500 (4,670) 4.2 x 109 (200 x 106)
Modulus in Tension, in
pounds per square foot
(kilonewtons per square
meter) 217,000 (10,380) 4.2 x 109 (200 x 106)
Tensile Strength, in
pounds per square foot
(kilonewtons per square
meter) 288 (14) 5.2 x 106 (2.48 x 105)
Poisson's Ratio 0.28 0.30
Initial Pressure Coefficient 0.60 0.43
Density (Wet Density for
Soil), in pounds per cu-
bic foot (kilonewtons
per cubic meter) 117 (1,878) 490 (7,850)

A Universal testing machine was used to apply load to the model foot-
ing using a constant rate of displacement. The load applied was read
directly from the Universal testing machine and the footing displace-
ment was monitored using a 0.001 in. (0.025 mm) dial gage. The load
was applied at the same constant displacement rate as used in the
strength tests. A total of 47 model footing tests were performed. De-
tailed information on footing tests is documented elsewhere (3).

|
I
I

I
I
i
t

I
I

FIG. 1.—Compacted Soil Mass with a Cavity after a Model Footing Test
4

J. Geotech. Engrg. 1983.109:1-14.

 THEORETICAL ANALYSIS

The finite element method of analysis was performed to investigate

the bearing capacity behavior of continuous footings subjected to static
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Southern Illinois University, Carbondale on 06/06/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

vertical central loading. The continuous footing is situated above a con-

tinuous void which is either rectangular of circular in cross section. As
shown in Figs. 2(a) and 2(b), B, Df, D, and W, designate the footing
width, depth of foundation, depth to void, and width (or diameter of
circular void), respectively. In the analysis, the foundation soil mass is
idealized as an assemblage of a finite number of discrete structural ele-
ments interconnected by a finite number of joints or nodal points. The
size of the elements are chosen to vary in accordance with the antici-
pated stress gradients. Fig. 3 shows a typical finite element mesh for a
2 in. (51 mm) footing located above a 6 in. (152 mm) wide void. The
void is 3 in. (76 mm) deep and the top of the void is 15 in. (380 mm)
below the bottom of the footing. The depth of foundation is 2.5 in. (64
mm).
In the finite element analysis, the foundation soil is treated as an elas-
tic-perfectly plastic material. Before yielding, i.e., within the elastic
range, the stress-strain relationship of the soil is described by Hooke's
law. Beyond the elastic range, the soil is assumed to behave as perfectly
plastic in accordance with von Mises yield criterion:

FOOTING [

H=W / VOID

FIG. 2.—Strip Footing Centered with a Continuous Void

M
1
-r IN
FOOTING
2,5

1
15 I N

k 4
¥

" VOID

3 IN rhh

FIG. 3.—Finite Element Mesh

5

J. Geotech. Engrg. 1983.109:1-14.

 f=ak + Vh = k (1)
and / = 0 (2)
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Southern Illinois University, Carbondale on 06/06/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

in which lx and }2 - the first stress invariant and the second stress in-
variant, respectively; a and k = constants which are functions of
strength parameters of the test soil. According to Drucker and Prager
(6), these two material constants for the plane strain condition can be
expressed as follows:
tan ()>
(3)
(9 + 12 tan 4>)I/2
3c
and k = (4)
(9 + 12 tan c)))1
in which c and 4> = cohesion and internal friction angle of the test soil,
respectively.
Based on these constitutive laws, and incremental stress-strain rela-
tionships for an elastic-perfectly plastic material developed by Reyes and
Deere (7), a finite element computer program was developed by Chang,
et al. (4). This computer program was adapted for analyzing footing
bearing capacity with various boundary conditions. The computer anal-
yses were performed using an IBM 370 Model 168 computer at Penn-
sylvania State University.
In the computer analysis, loading increments of 5% of the total load
to be applied to the footing are used so that the nonlinear stress-strain
property of the soil can be better accounted for. Three iterations at each

(CM)
0 2 1 6 8 10 12
180
' 1200

160 -
110 1000

- 120 r ,_FINITE ELEMENT j t ^ L ^

\ANALYSIS B^J'
£
S 100 -
/ ^ ~ T E S T RESULTS
600 '
£
80
zto
) FOOTIN
's 60
B s 2 IN. •
100
SOIL
U4 D D * 15 IN.
10 W » 6 IN.
1 VOID I H
H » 3 IN.
20
RnrK 1 ™ | - 200

0
0 1 2 i 4 ' 0
FOOTING DISPLACEMENT (IN)

FIG 4.—Comparison of Results of Finite Element Analysis and Model Footing

Test

J. Geotech. Engrg. 1983.109:1-14.

 load increment are found sufficient to provide acceptable levels of re-
finement in final displacement values. Results of a sensitivity analysis
indicate that within the range of conditions analyzed, the computed
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Southern Illinois University, Carbondale on 06/06/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

stress, strain, and displacement are practically insensitive to the change

in modulus in tension, initial earth pressure coefficient, and Poisson's
ratio. This is especially true when stress level approaches the failure
load.
Using the properties in Table 1, the bearing capacity of continuous
footing centered above a continuous underground void was analyzed
for a total of 11 boundary conditions. Some of the boundary conditions
analyzed were duplicated in the model footing test to validate the results
of the finite element analysis.

COMPARISON OF RESULTS

A comparison is made between the results of finite element analysis

and model footing test for footing pressure versus displacement rela-
tionship and for bearing capacity. Fig. 4 shows the footing pressure-dis-
placement curves obtained from the analysis and the test for a 2-in. (51-
mm) footing with 6 in. (152-mm) void located at approx 15-in. (381-mm)
below the bottom of the footing. Recall that the computer generated re-
sults are for the condition of 17% water content, 100 pcf (1,602 kg/m 3 )
dry density with 15.0 in. (381 mm) depth to void; whereas the conditions
of the test are 16.8% water content, 101 pcf (1618 kg/m 3 ) dry density
with 14.9 in. (378 mm) depth to void. With this slight deviation in soil
and void conditions, the agreement between the two curves is consid-
ered excellent.
Fig. 5 compares the'computed and the measured bearing capacities
for a 2 in. (51 mm) surface footing with 6 in. (152 mm) and 23 in. (584
mm) voids located at varying depths. The test data points are somewhat
scattered, possibly due to the nonuniformity in mixing (with water) and
compaction because of the large amount of soil needed in the test tank;

MEASURED FROM NO-VOID CONDITION

VOID WIDTH = 23 IN (581 MM) 1200
VOID WIDTH » 6 IN (152 MID
0 " MEASURED VALUES
• * COMPUTED VALUES 1000

800 _

DEPTH TO VOID (IN)

FIG. 5.—Comparison of Computed and Measured Bearing Capacity

7

J. Geotech. Engrg. 1983.109:1-14.

 nevertheless, the trend of bearing capacity variation with void size and
location is clearly defined. The computed bearing capacity values (four
points) are located within the range of test data variation indicating a
good agreement between the results of analysis and test.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Southern Illinois University, Carbondale on 06/06/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

The close agreement between the results of theoretical analysis and

model footing test permits the use of finite element method to investi-
gate the bearing capacity behavior of continuous footing with various
boundary conditions. Results of the investigation are presented in the
following for various conditions including footing size; depth of foun-
dation; and location, size, and shape of the void; the void size and lo-
cation are expressed in terms of the footing size.

BEARING CAPACITY BEHAVIOR

For the footings tested and analyzed, the footing pressure increases
with vertical displacement in the work-softening manner. Fig. 6 shows
that for a given void size, the maximum footing pressure occurs at a
smaller displacement when the void is closer to the footing. This is as
would be expected because when the void is located near the footing,
the soil mass underneath the footing is thin and can only accommodate
a limited shear strain before failure. With the same reasoning, it can also

0 1 2 3 1 5 6
1200

1000

800 _

„!
100

200

"0 0.5 1,0 1.5 2.0 2.5 "

FOOTING DISPLACEMENT (IN)

FIG. 6.—Variation of Footing Pressure—Displacement Relations with D/B Ratio

(CM)
0 1 2 3 1 5 6

120
-
D/B - 3 800
W/B - 0 ^ - ^ ' ^ ^ '
SO ; C00
/ ? 100 5
10
• / ^ ^ ^ ? ;
200
•

0
"C OTS O 175" 2~.0 2.5°
FOOTING DISPLACEMENT (IN)

FIG. 7.—Variation of Footing Pressure-—Displacement Relations with W/B Ratio

8

J. Geotech. Engrg. 1983.109:1-14.

 be expected that, for a given depth to void, increasing the void size will
decrease the displacement at maximum footing pressure, as shown in
Fig. 7. Regardless of the difference in footing displacement, the maxi-
mum footing pressure is taken as the bearing capacity of the footing in
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Southern Illinois University, Carbondale on 06/06/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

the analysis which follows.

Figs. 5, 6, and 7 show that the bearing capacity depends greatly on
the size and location of the void. For easy presentation, the void size,
W, and depth to void, D, are combined with the footing size, B, into a
dimensionless ratio, and the bearing capacities of the footings with voids
are expressed as a percentage of the bearing capacity of no-void con-
dition. Fig. 8 presents the results of the analysis regarding the variation
of bearing capacity with D/B for different values of W/B. Note that for
clarity the actual data points are not presented. As shown in Fig. 5, the
data points are somewhat scattered but the trend is very clearly defined.
Fig. 8 demonstrates that for a given W/B, the effect of void on bearing
capacity diminishes as D/B increases. In other words, the bearing ca-
pacity becomes smaller when the void is located closer to the footing.
This is primarily because at smaller depths to void, the soil mass un-
derneath the footing is thin so that the total shearing resistance which
can be mobilized is low. The effect vanishes when D/B reaches a value
which hereinafter is called critical void depth to footing width ratio, (D/
B)„.
The value oi(D/B)cr increases with W/B at an ever decreasing rate and
eventually approaches a value of about 12, as shown in Fig. 9. Fig. 9
indicates that when a void is located at a depth (measured from the
bottom of the footing) equal to or greater than 12 times the footing
width, the bearing capacity of the footing is not affected by the presence
of the void regardless of the size of the void. Furthermore, according
to the general shear failure mechanism for no-void condition, it is gen-
erally believed that there is a critical depth under which the soil has
negligible influence on the bearing capacity of the footing. This critical

7 9
D/B RATIO

FIG. 8.—Bearing Capacity of Strip Footing as a Function of Void Size and

Location

J. Geotech. Engrg. 1983.109:1-14.

 18

16

11
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Southern Illinois University, Carbondale on 06/06/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

12

filO
1 ^FOOTING
S 8
MHL""L_B_J
D
6
/ 1 VOID | ]
XT

1 / ROCK

0 2 1 6 8 10 12

FIG. 9.—Effect of Void Width on Critical Depth to Void

depth is commonly taken at the bottom of the radial shear zone and is
generally no more than two times the footing width. This value of crit-
ical depth is considerably small compared with the values given in Fig.
9. Thus, for footings located above a void, the general shear mechanism
for no-void condition is unable to provide a reasonable estimate of crit-
ical depth.
The preceding results are obtained for rectangular voids. To determine
whether the results differ for different void shapes, a comparison is
made for circular, square, and rectangular voids. The conditions ana-
lyzed include 2 in. (51 mm) footing width, 15 in. (381 mm) depth to
void, and 6 in. (152 mm) void width (for the square void) or diameter
(for the circular void). Results of the analysis are presented in Fig. 10.
Also included in the figure is a curve for a rectangular void which is 6
in. (152 mm) wide, 3 in. (76 mm) high, and located at the same depth;
this curve is replotted from Fig. 4. It is seen that the three curves are
very close together despite the difference in the void shape and void
height. Therefore, for practical purposes, the void shape has negligible
effect on the bearing capacity for the boundary conditions analyzed.
An analysis is also made for a 6-in. (152-mm) square void located at
different locations with respect to the soil-bedrock interface. The footing
analyzed is 2 in. (51 mm) wide and the depth to the top of void is 15
in. (381 mm). The 6-in. (152-mm) square void is located at four different
positions: (1) The top of the void is flush with the top of the bedrock;
(2) the top of the void is 3 in. (76 mm) above the top of the bedrock;
(3) the bottom of the void is at the top of the bedrock; and (4) the bottom
of the void is 3 in. (76 mm) above the top of the bedrock. The footing
pressure-displacement curves for the four different void locations are
shown in Fig. 11. Note that the curves for conditions (2) and (3) are,
respectively, the same curves for the rectangular void and square void
as given in Fig. 10. It is seen that the highest bearing capacity occurs at
condition (1). This is probably because the bedrock is closest (15 in. (381
mm)) to the footing among the four different conditions. With the same
reasoning, it can be explained that condition (2) gives the second highest
j bearing capacity. Also, it would be expected that the condition (4),
i which has the greatest distance (24 in. (608 mm)) between the footing
10

J. Geotech. Engrg. 1983.109:1-14.

 (CM)
0 2 1 6 8 10 12
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Southern Illinois University, Carbondale on 06/06/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

1000

128 PS I

800

600

1(00

200

0 1 2 3 k 5
FOOTING DISPLACEMENT (lN>

FIG. 10.—Effect of Void Shape on Bearing Capacity of Strip Footing

and bedrock, will offer the lowest bearing capacity. Results of the anal-
ysis, however, indicate that the bearing capacity for condition (2) is
slightly lower than that of condition (4). Exact reasons for this result are
yet to be determined. According to this figure, it would be reasonable
to assume for practical purposes that the bearing capacity is not signif-
icantly affected by the position of the void (with respect to the bedrock
surface) so long as the distance between the footing and the top of the
void remains constant and the top of the void is above the bedrock
surface.
The effect of the depth of foundation, Df, on bearing capacity is in-
vestigated for several boundary conditions. Fig. 12 shows that results
of analysis for 2 in. (51 mm) wide footing with 6 in. (152 mm) wide void.
The results clearly indicate an increase in bearing capacity with increas-
ing depth of foundation when the depth to void, D, is maintained con-
stant. This is apparently attributed to the increased overburden pres-
sure; the greater shearing resistance under higher overburden pressures
results in an increase in bearing capacity. The rate of bearing capacity
increase with increasing depth of foundation appears to be greater at
larger D/B, according to Fig. 12.

PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS

The various graphs presented earlier provide useful data for design of
continuous shallow foundation located above a continuous void in silty
clay soils. By the use of Fig. 9, it is possible to determine whether the
existing void will influence the performance of the proposed foundation
or whether the existing foundation will be influenced by the proposed
mining or tunneling. If the foundation performance is found to be af-
11

J. Geotech. Engrg. 1983.109:1-14.

 (CM)
6
180
•1200
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Southern Illinois University, Carbondale on 06/06/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

— Q„ » 111 PSI 1000

123 PSI

600 E

IN VOID
S0IL
•N T

• 200

FOOTING DISPLACEMENT (IN)

FIG. 11.—Computer Generated Pressure—Displacement Curves for Different Po-

sitions of Void

wo
900

800
^D/B = 6.25 SOIL D
w ,
700
100 VOID 1 H

ROCK 600 •

,.—--— ~ D ? B = 5,25
B = 2 IN.
W » 6 IN.
•
H = 3 IN. 500
c = 1370 PSF
• - 13.5°

300

FIG. 12.—Effect of Depth of Foundation on Bearing Capacity of Strip Footing

fected by the presence of the void, the reduction in bearing capacity can
be estimated by using Fig. 8. From Fig. 8, it is also possible to estimate
footing size required to maintain stability for various void sizes and dif-
ferent void locations.
According to Fig. 10, void shape has negligible effect on the footing
pressure-displacement behavior. Therefore, results obtained from Fig.
8 and 9 are valid regardless of the void shape, at least within the con-
ditions analyzed. Furthermore, foundation is normally embedded in the
ground. Embedment results in a greater bearing capacity, as indicated
by Fig. 12. Thus, some margin of safety is provided by using Fig. 8 for
foundation design.
12

J. Geotech. Engrg. 1983.109:1-14.

 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The bearing capacity behavior of strip footing located above a contin-

uous void in silty clay soils was investigated. The study involved model
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Southern Illinois University, Carbondale on 06/06/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

footing testing and theoretical analysis. The footing testing was con-
ducted in a test tank which contained a compacted silty clay as the foun-
dation soil. The theoretical analysis was made by using the finite ele-
ment method in which the test soil was treated as an elastic perfectly
plastic material.
Results of the theoretical analysis agree well with the experimental
data. There exists a critical depth below which the presence of the void
has negligible influence on the footing performance. When the void is
located above the critical depth, the bearing capacity of the footing de-
pends greatly on the various factors such as the depth of foundation
and the size and location of the void. Results of the study are presented
graphically.
Based on the results of the study, it is concluded that the bearing ca-
pacity behavior of continuous footing located above a void can be ana-
lyzed successfully by using the finite element method. Results of the
study provide a data base useful for estimation of bearing capacity of
continuous footing centered with an underground void in silty clay soils.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The research reported herein was sponsored in part by Central Fund

for Research, Pennsylvania State University. The theoretical analysis
was performed at the computation center of Pennsylvania State Uni-
versity. This financial support is gratefully acknowledged. The writers
wish to express their sincere appreciation to C. Y. Chang, Woodward-
Lundgren & Associates, for his guidance during the course of adapting
his finite element computer program.

APPENDIX I.—REFERENCES

1. Atkinson, J., Brown, E., and Potts, M., "Collapse of Shallow Unlined Tun-
nels in Dense Sand," Tunnels and Tunnelling, Vol. 7, No. 3, May-June, 1975,
pp. 81-87.
2. Atkinson, J., and Cairncross, A., "Collapse of a Shallow Tunnel in a Mohr-
Coulomb Material," Proceedings of the Symposium on the Role of Plasticity in Soil
Mechanics, Cambridge, England, 1973, pp. 202-206.
3. Baus, R. L., The Stability of Shallow Continuous Footings Located Above Voids,
dissertation presented to Pennsylvania State University, at University Park,
Penn., in Mar., 1980, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree
of Doctor of Philosophy.
4. Bowles, J., Foundation Analysis and Design, McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York,
N.Y., 1974, p. 51.
5. Chang, C. Y., Nair, K., and Singh, R., "Finite Element Method and Time-
Dependent Analysis of Geotechnical Problems," Analysis and Design in Geo-
technical Engineering, Conference Proceedings, ASCE, Austin, Tex., Vol. 1,
June, 1974, pp. 269-301.
6. Drucker, D., and Prager, W., "Soil Mechanics and Plastic Analysis in Limit
Design," Quarterly of Applied Mathematics, Vol. 10, No. 2, 1952, pp. 157-165.
7. Reyes, S., and Deere, D., "Elastic-Plastic Analysis of Underground Opening
by the Finite Element Method," Proceedings of the First International Congress
13

J. Geotech. Engrg. 1983.109:1-14.

 on Rock Mechanics, Lisbon, Spain, Vol. 2, 1966, pp. 447-483.
8. Simons, N., "Settlement Studies of Two Structures in Norway," Proceedings
of the Fourth International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineer-
ing, London, England, Vol. 2, 1957, pp. 431-436.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Southern Illinois University, Carbondale on 06/06/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

9. Terzaghi, K., "Arching in Ideal Soils," Chapter 5, Theoretical Soil Mechanics,

John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, N.Y., 1943, pp. 66-76.
10. Terzaghi, K., "Stress Distribution in Dry and in Saturated Sand above a Yield-
ing Trap-Door," Proceedings of the International Conference on Soil Mechanics,
Cambridge, Mass., Vol. 1, 1936, pp. 307-311.
11. Wang, M. C , and Baus, R. L., "Settlement Behavior of Footing Above Void,"
Proceedings, Second Conference on Ground Movements and Structures, Car-
diff, Apr., 1980, pp. 168-184.
12. Winterkorn, H., and Fang, H., Foundation Engineering Handbook, Von Nos-
trand Reinhold, New York, N.Y., 1975, pp. 751.

APPENDIX II.—NOTATION

The following symbols are used in this paper:

B = footing width;
c = cohesion;
D = depth to the top of void measured from the bottom of footing;
Df = d e p t h of foundation;
/ = yield function;
H = height of void;
lt = first stress invariant;
/2 = second stress invariant;
k = material constant;
W = width of void or diameter of circular void;
a. = material constant; a n d
4> = angle of internal friction.

14

J. Geotech. Engrg. 1983.109:1-14.