Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Vol. 42, No.

4, 2005

SOIL MECHANICS BEARING CAPACITY OF THE GRANULAR BED OF A STRIP FOUNDATION UNDER AN INCLINED ECCENTRIC LOAD

V. G. Fedorovskii
Scientific-Research Institute of Foundations and Underground Structures.

UDC 624.131

Exact solutions are presented for the bearing capacity of a weighted noncohesive Coulomb bed supporting a strip foundation. The effect of the incline and eccentricity of the load is analyzed on the basis of these solutions.

In this study, we propose a solution for the problem of the stability of a footing on the surface of a granular bed (i.e., a bed, whose material possesses nonzero dead weight and angle of internal friction, and zero cohesion), which generalizes the familiar solution. Lundgren and Mortensen [1] generalize in the same sense as in Fedorovskii's solution [2, 3] the Prandtl solution [4] for the case of a weightless cohesive bed. The body of mathematics required to solve this problem by methods of the theory of limiting equilibrium consists of Ketter's equation for the stresses along the slip line, and Boussinesq's equation for the limiting equilibrium of a granular wedge [5]. Boussinnesq And Ketter Equations. Let us examine a granular half-plane (z 0) (special case of a wedge) with an unrestrained horizontal boundary (x 0), the second part of which is acted on by a load triangularly distributed and inclined at an angle to the normal (Fig. 1a). It is convenient to perform all analyzes in the polar coordinate system {r, }, where is the angle reckoned counterclockwise from the vertical. Using Mohr's circle for a wedge existing in the limiting stress state, it is possible to obtain the following stress representation:

r = (1 + sin cos2); = (1 sin cos2); r = sin sin2;

(1)

where is the average stress at the point in question, is the angle of internal friction, and is the angle that the direction of the maximum principal stress deviates from the polar radius (see Fig. 1a). The Boussinesq substitution

= rS()

(2)

(where is the specific unit weight of the material) reduces the problem of determining the stress state of the half-plane to a search for the two functions S and of a single variable . Substituting (1) and (2) in the equation of equilibrium, we obtain the following system of ordinary differential equations, which we will call Boussinesq equations

Translated from Osnovaniya, Fundamenty i Mekhanika Gruntov, No. 4, pp. 2-7, July-August, 2005. 0038-0741/05/4204-0111

2005 Springer Science+Business Media, Inc.

111

Fig. 1. For derivation of Boussinesq (a) and Ketter (b) equations.

dS S sin 2 sin(2 + ) = ; d cos 2 sin

d cos sin cos(2 + ) S cos2 +1 = . d 2 S sin (cos 2 sin )

(3)

Solutions (3) (details are given in [6]), which correspond to the maximum (passive) pressure on the bed, can be written as Sb(, ), b(, ), and b(, ), where = /2 + is the angle read from the loaded surface, and () is the equation of the slip line in polar coordinates, which can be obtained by integrating the differential equation
d = d tan( )

(4)

for the initial conditions (0) = 1 and = /4 /2. Note that this is not the "active" slip line, along which maximum displacements will occur and which corresponds to the line of failure in the type of solutions given in [4], but is connected to the active line. These functions play a key role in the method described below for analysis of the bearing capacity of the granular bed of a footing. Note that they depend parametrically on the angle of incline of the load, which corresponds to the angle of contact friction a, as determined by the degree of roughness of the lower surface of the footing. In the study, moreover, it is assumed that the normal n = cos2 and tangential = ntan stresses conform to the Ketter equation, which takes on the form [7]
d n sin( + ) cos d + 2 + = 0, cos dx dx

(5)

where = arctan(dy/dx), for the case of "left-handed" mutual displacement of the soil masses under consideration (see Fig. 1b). In the form of logarithmic spirals or straight lines, this equation for the slip lines has the analytical solution given below.
112

b
x

Fig. 2. Diagrams used for solution in case of two-sided venting.

Stability of Footing on Granular Bed (Case of Two-sided Venting). Let us examine a strip footing with a width b on the surface of a granular bed. As in [2, 3], the change in the failure diagram as compared with the initial one (with a Lundgren-Mortensen diagram [1]) is associated with losses of symmetry, i.e., with transition from a central vertical to an eccentric and/or inclined load on the footing. According to the proposed diagram (Fig. 2), nondeformable triangular core B1C1B2, which is bounded on the lower right by curvilinear slip line B1C1, and on the lower left by smooth sectional curvilinear slip line B2C2C1, abuts the lower surface of the footing. Venting regions B1C1D1E1A1 and B2C2D2E2A2 (not shown in Fig. 2b and c) abut the core and lower surface of the footing, respectively. Lower surface A1A2 of the footing with a width b is divided into three segments: central segment B1B2, where the footing is adhered to the rigid core, and two boundary segments A1B1 and A2B2 with widths of b1 and b2, respectively, where the bulging soil slips along the lower surface. The friction against the lower surface is directed from the axis of symmetry of the footing, and the coefficient of friction is equal to tana, where a is the angle of contact friction (0 a ). The maximum Rankine and Boussinesq limiting-stress states occur in zones A1D1E1 and A2D2E2, and B1C1D1A1 and B2C2D2A2, respectively (see above). Isolated slip line C1C2, which separates the stiff core and rigid mass of stationary soil may (from conditions of kinematic acceptability for a medium conforming to the law of plastic flow associated with the Coulomb condition) is merely a section of a logarithmic spiral with a center at point O (see Fig. 2 a and b), or a straight line (Fig. 2c). As a result of loss of stability, i.e., when the load P on the footing reaches the limiting value for a given incline and eccentricity e (see Fig. 2a), the footing moves in unison with the core by rotating clockwise (see Fig. 2a), or counterclockwise (see Fig. 2b), or back-and-forth about point O at an angle to line C1C2 (see Fig. 2c).
113

Let us define the basic elements of the stress state and geometry at point C1 (at the top of the core). r1 = b1b(1, a) = b11; 1 = r1Sb(1, a) = b1S1; 1 = b(1, a),

(6)

where 1 is the average stress at point C1, 1 is the angle formed by the maximum principal stress with radius A1C1, and the geometric parameters r1 and 1 are shown in Fig. 2. The angular deviation of the tangent to slip line B1C1 at point C1 from the vertical

1 = /2 1 1 + .

(7)

Radius OC1 = R1 of logarithmic spiral C1C2 falls on this tangent. The angle between the radius and spiral is equal to /2 at each point. The second radius R2 = OC2 is inclined to the vertical by the angle

2 = /2 + 2 + 2 + ,

(8)

where 2 and the other parameters of the stress state are found from formulas (6) after replacing all subscripts 1 with 2. To simplify writing of the relationships for the logarithmic spiral, let us introduce the index m = sign(1 2). (9)

The case m = 1 corresponds to Fig. 2a, m = -1 to Fig. 2b, and m = 0 to Fig. 2c. Considering this, R = Rsexp[( s)tan] (10)

for an arbitrary point of the spiral in the polar coordinates {R, } with a center at point O, where Rs is the radius corresponding to a certain angle s. Along this spiral, Ketter equation (5) has the solution
cos cos( s ) ( ) = s + mRs 2( exp [ s) tan ] cos 2 cos cos( ) exp[ ( s ) tan ], mRs cos 2

(11)

where s is the average stress at point = s, and = arctan(3tan). The three conditions (two geometric, and one force) b = xA1 xA2 = r2cos2 mR2sin2 + mR1sin1 + r1cos1; 0 = yA1 yA2 = r2sin2 mR2cos2 + mR1cos1 + r1sin1; 2 1 = (2) (1)

(12)

should be fulfilled to solve the problem for assigned 1 and 2. After substituting expressions (6) in lieu of ri and i, and expressions (10) and (11), respectively, in lieu of Ri and (i) for s = 2 (i.e., Rs = R2), we obtain a system of three linear equations in terms of b1, b2, and R2 b11cos1 + b22cos2 + mR2(sin1 sin2) = b; b11sin1 b22sin2 + mR2(cos1 cos2) = 0;

114

 b2 2 S2 cos mR2 2 cos 2 cos(2 ) cos(1 ) = 0, 2 b1 1S1

(13)

where = exp[(2 1)tan]. Solution (13) should satisfy the following conditions: b1 > 0, b2 0; R2 > 0. If only one of these conditions is violated, the solution is physically impossible, i.e., no solution exists for a given combination of input parameters {1, 2}. In the case m = 0 (see Fig. 2c), the logarithmic spiral degenerates into line C1C2, whose slope to the horizontal, which is read counterclockwise, is equal to + , where = 1 = 2. The integral of the Ketter equation along the straight slip line takes on the form

= s + ( x xs )

sin( ) = cos cos sin = s + ( x xs ) . cos cos( + )

(14)

Introducing the notation d12 = C1C2 and performing transformations similar to those carried out in the derivation of (13), we obtain a system of three linear equations in terms of b1, b2, and d12 b11cos1 + b22cos2 + d12cos( + ) = b; b11sin1 b22sin2 d12sin( + ) = 0; b11S1 b22S2 d12sin/cos = 0.

(15)

0, and d12 0 for solution (15) assume explicit physiThe conditions of acceptability b1 > 0, b2 cal significance. After defining the geometry of the solution for assigned 1 and 2, it is possible to determine the parameters of the limiting load from the equilibrium condition, generally speaking, of curvilinear tetragon A1C1C2A2. Along lines AiCi (i = 1, 2), the plots of the normal and tangential stresses are triangular (with zeros at vertices Ai), and are determined from representation of Boussinesq stresses (1)

n = rSi (1 sin cos2i); = rSi sin sini,

where r is the distance to vertex Ai. The stresses on slip-line segment C1C2 can be obtained from the formulas

(16)

n = cos2 ; = n tan,

(17)

0), or (15) (for m = 0). The integral over this segment where is determined from formula (11) (for m is taken analytically, including the integral of the weight of the soil, as over segments AiCi. The vertical V and horizontal H components of the limiting load P on the footing, and also its moment M0 about the origin of coordinates located at the center of the lower surface of the footing can be found from the equilibrium conditions of A1C1C2A2. We can then determine the incline and eccentricity of the load

=arctan(H/V); e = M0 /V.

(18)
115

Fig. 3. Diagram of solution for case of one-side venting.

Returning to the Lundgren-Mortensen solution, let us point out how it differs in two basic ways from the proposed solution. Firstly, Lundgren and Mortensen [1] analyze only the case of a central vertical load, when 1 = 2, whereupon points C1 and C2 coincide. In the proposed solution, however, it is possible to vary and e independently (these two parameters correspond to the two independent parameters 1 and 2 of the solution). Secondly, only the case of an ideally rough surface, i.e., a = , is discussed in [1]. Here, however, any angle of contact friction is possible. We examined the case when under two-sided venting, the pressure of a footing that has lost stability is directed to the right on the whole, which also explains the solution's asymmetry. As the footing moves to the left, it is necessary to reflect a mirror image of the entire diagram about the central axis x = 0. In the general case, both variants should be examined, and smaller limiting-load values selected. In reality, this will result in the fact that only the solution for 0 will assume physical significance for preferentially right-sided venting. Stability of Footing on Granular Bed (Case of One-sided Venting). One-side venting, when the bed of the footing is unloaded from the left (Fig. 3) is of major practical interest. The problem is simplified somewhat. The parameters of the solution will be 1 and 2. Three alternate schemes of the solution are again possible, depending on the sign of the difference 1 2 (see Fig. 3a, b, and c). The difference between the stress 2 and 0 at the end point of the footing differs significantly from that for the case of two-sided venting. When m 0, we obtain the following analogy of system of equations (13) in terms of the unknowns b1, 2, and R2
116

b11cos1 + mR2(sin1 sin2) = b; b11sin1 + mR2(cos1 cos2) = 0; cos cos( 2 ) b1 1S1 2 mR2 cos( 1 ) = 0. 2 cos 2 2

(19)

When m = 0, unknowns b1, 2, and d12 = C1C2, and the solving system of equations (analogy (15)) b11cos1 + d12cos( + ) = b; b11sin1 d12sin( + ) = 0; b11S1 2 d12sin/cos = 0.

(20)

The parameters of the limiting load are determined from the equilibrium conditions, generally speaking, of curvilinear tetragon A1C1C2, i.e., integration over A2C2 drops out as compared with the previous case. Constraints on the solution include both the preceding ones (b1 > 0, R2 > 0, or d12 0), and also new ones (2 0, (a + a)/2 2 +(a + a)/2, where a = arcsin(sina/sin)). The last pair of inequalities implies a limitation on the absolute magnitude of the ratio ( /n ) to a value of tana over the lower surface of the footing at corner point C2. Procedure for Solution And Results of Analysis. As in [2, 3], the proposed solution is obtained not directly (based on a given eccentricity e and incline of the load), but parametrically for the parameters 1 and 2 (or 2). The general solution set for all possible combinations of these parameters covers a certain region on the {e, } plane. In addition to the above-indicated constraints, those solutions in which the inequality imposed from kinematic considerations [3] is not fulfilled for the coordinates of the center of rotation x0 + y0tan 0.5b b1 (21)

is not fulfilled are dropped for both forms of venting in the case m = 1. In fixing the angle , the moment when this inequality converts to an equality corresponds to attainment of the minimum possible load eccentricity emin, while the maximum possible eccentricity emax is attained when 2 = 0 (two-sided venting) or 2 = (a + a)/2 (one-sided venting). When the eccentricity goes beyond the allowable limits, separation of a portion of the footing from the surface of the bed occurs so that the required maximum (or minimum) eccentricity is retained in the remaining portion. The limiting load here is determined from the formula [2]
2 b 2e V (emax ) b 2emax V (e) = 2 b + 2e V (emin ) b + 2emin

when e > e max . when e < e min

(22)

In the case of one-sided venting when e > emax, separation occurs from the back bottom of the footing, and one-sided venting goes over to two-sided. No jump occurs, however, since both solutions are in agreement o at this moment (Fig. 4). This figure shows the V(e) curve when = 0 and 5 for two-sided (solid lines) and o one-sided (broken lines) venting when = a = 30 . Note that the V(e) diagram for = 0 and e < 0 corresponds to preferentially left-sided venting in terms of the scheme of two-sided venting. Preferentially right- and two-sided venting (see Fig. 2) occurs only when > 0. If, however, < 0, the solution diagram is symmetric about the y axis. For the case of two-sided venting, a solution is given only for positive angles of incline, and is symmetric for negative angles of incline. When e > emax, there is no solution for one-sided venting. For a fixed angle of incline , maximum bearing capacity is attained for
117

Fig. 4. Dependence of bearing capacity on eccentricity of load applied at two angles of incline. Points denote boundaries of region of existence of separation-free solution (limiting eccentricities): __ __) two-sided, and; _ _ _ _) one-sided venting.

TABLE 1
Venting 0 Two-sided One-sided Values of N = 2V/ b2 for ao of 5 10 15 20 25 30 14.76* 15.05

7.65** 9.87 11.75 13.14 14.03 14.61 13.90 14.57 14.91

TABLE 2
Venting 5 Two-sided One-sided 10 15

N values for o of
20 25 30 35 40 45 0.113 0.433 1.181 2.839 6.492 14.76 34.48 85.58 234.3 15.05 35.24 87.46 239.1

Approximation (23) 0.075 0.389 1.182 2.948 6.797 15.07 33.92 79.55 200.8

that eccentricity e corresponding to m = 0, i.e., to displacement of the footing without rotation (see Figs 2c and 3c). o Let us cite examples of the calculations when = 30 . For the case e = = 0 (vertical central load), 2 values of N = 2V/ b are presented in Table 1 for different a values. It is apparent from the table that the bearing capacity increases somewhat with one-sided venting, but there is no solution (traced line) for small a, i.e., maximum eccentricity is negative (emax < 0). When a = 0 in the case of two-sided venting, the core degenerates into a point, and failure occurs in accordance with Hill's scheme. Lundgren and Mortensen [1] examine a unique case for conditions of two-sided venting, which is denoted by an asterisk in the table, and the response agrees with that given in Table 1. In his book [8], Malyshev cites yet another exact solution. It applies to two-sided venting for an ideally smooth footing, when Hill's failure scheme is realized. Here, the numerical result also agrees with that given in Table 1 (noted by two asterisks).
118

Table 2 presents N values for different angles for an ideally rough footing and for both alternate venting schemes. It is apparent from the table that for the case of one-sided venting, there is also no solution when the angles are small. Here, however, an approximation proposed by Brinch-Hansen [9] is given for analytical calculation of N
1 + sin N = 1.5( N q 1) tan = 1,5 e tan 1 tan . 1 sin

(23)

Let us point out in conclusion that in terms of the shape and size of the venting region, the exact solution obtained differs appreciably from the analogous solution for the case of a weightless cohesive bed [2, 3]; this also renders the three-term Terzaghi formula principally inaccurate.
REFERENCES 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. H. Lundgren and K. Mortensen, Determination by the theory of plasticity of the bearing capacity of continuous footings on sand, Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Vol. 1, Zurich (1953), pp. 409-412. V. G. Fedorovsky, Stability of foundations under eccentric and inclined loads, Proceedings of the Twelfth International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Vol. 2, Rio-de-Janeiro (1989), pp. 421-425. V. G. Fedorovskii, "Bearing capacity of a continuous foundation subject to eccentric inclined loading. Weightless cohesive bed," Osn., Fundam. Mekh. Gruntov, No. 5, 7-14 (2003). L. Prandtl, On the hardness of plastic materials and resistance to shear, Theory of Plasticity [Russian translation], Moscow (1948), pp. 70-79. V. V. Sokolovskii, Statics of Granular Media [in Russian], Gostekhizdat, Moscow (1954). V. G. Fedorovskii and N. V. Vorob'ev, "Limiting equilibrium of a granular wedge and coefficients of active and passive pressure," Izv. Vses. Nauchno-issled. Inst Gidrotekhniki, No. 239 (2001). V. G. Fedorovskii, Ketter equation for soil with anisotropy and heterogeneity of strength characteristics," Tr. Nauchno-issled. Inst. Osn. Podzem. Sooruzh., No. 88 (1987). M. V. Malyshev, Soil Strength And Bed Stability of Structures [in Russian], Stroiizdat, Moscow (1994). J. Brinch-Hansen, A revised and extended formula for bearing capacity, Danish Geotechnical Institute Bulletin No. 28, Copenhagen (1970), pp. 5-11.

119