SEC.

9:2] STABILITY-BEARING CAPACITY 391

into sewers and deep excavations or because of pumping for water supply.
This may increase building settlements by increasing soil stresses, or it may
cause rotting of timbers formerly submerged well below the water level. On
the other hand, if the water level rises through flooding, protracted rainfall,
or broken water mains, soil strength is decreased and failures may occur.
In some cases watertight structures such as empty concrete swimming pools
and buried tanks have floated out of their normal locations because of the
high water table that normally occurs in late winter and spring.
Underground cavities such as mines, caves, and sewers are hazards to
foundations because they sometimes collapse from overload or structural
deterioration. Piping or internal erosion of soil into leaky sewers or cavities
likewise can cause trouble. If possible, foundations should be moved from
these defects or corrective measures taken to make them harmless.

9:2 Stability-Bearing Capacity

The bearing capacity of a soil, often termed its stability, is the ability of
the soil to carry a load without failure within the soil mass. It is analogous
to the ability of a beam to carry a load without breaking. The load-carrying
capacity of soil varies not only with its strength but also with the magnitude
and distribution of the load. When a load Q is applied to a soil in gradually
incrd.sing amounts, the soil deforms, making a load-settlement curve similar
to a stress-strain curve. When the critical or failure load, Q0 , is reached, the
rate of deformation increases. The load-settlement curve goes through a
point of maximum curvature, indicating failure within the soil mass. Different
curves (Fig. 9.1) are obtained, depending on the character of the soil that is

.,E

Figure 9.1 Load settlement.

loaded. Dense sand and insensitive clay usually show a sharp sudden failure,
whereas loose sand and sensitive clay show a more gradual transition
associated with progressive failure.
If the soil is observed during loading by means of a glass sided model
or by an excavation adjacent to a full size foundation, it will be seen that
there are usually three stages in the development of a foundation failure.
First, the soil beneath the foundation is forced downward in a cone or wedge,
392 FOUNDATIONS [CH. 9

Fig. 9.2a. The soil below the wedge is forced downward and outward.
Imaginary lines in the soil that were initially vertical now bulge outward like
a barrel. Second, the soil around the foundation perimeter pulls away from
the foundation, and surfaces of shear propagate outward from the tip of the
cone or wedge, Fig. 9.2b. If the soil is very compressible .or can endure large
strains without plastic flow, the failure is confined to fan-shaped zones of
local shear. The foundation will displace downward with little load increase:
one form of bearing capacity failure. If the soil is more rigid, the shear zone
propagates outward until a continuous surface of failure extends to the
ground surface and the surface heaves, Fig. 9.2c. This is termed general
shear failure. The failure can be symmetrical, particularly if rotation is
restricted by a column attached to the foundation, or it can tilt as in Fig. 9.2d.
Such a bearing-capacity failure is not common, but it almost always results
in a complete failure of the structure.

;o,
� D e p, � Crack
·-
·,1<·.;_._.)·.f(--:..: .- ·_ · _· :·.
/: _·. , . {�Elasiic bulge
lj_ . : :·-1.: ..
r 1·1 ·elastic bulge

a. Stage of ;la�ii� distortion b. Stage of local shear and cracking

and bulging inside mass (after Vesic and Berezantzev)

c. Stage of general shear failure, d. Stage of general shear failure,

symetrical (after Terzaghi) tilting to one side
Figure 9.2 Development of shear failure benearh a foundarion.

No exact mathematical analysis has been derived for analyzing such a

failure. A number of approximate methods that have been developed are
based on simplified representations of the complex failure surface and of
the soil properties.
BEARING-CAPACITY ANALYSIS / A simple and conservative
analysis was developed by Bell, extended by Terzaghi, and further modified
by the authors. The method approximates the curved failure surfaces with a
set of straight lines, as shown in Fig. 9.3.
A foundation having a width of B and an infinite length is assumed,
similar to a long wall footing. At the moment of failure the foundation exerts
a pressure of q0, which is the ultimate bearing capacity, or simply bearing
 EC. 9:2) STABILITY-BEARING CAPACITY
393

a i 71I f
L__�____J_l_
I
I II I a I 8 tan a

Failure plane

a. Zones of compression b. Zonell c. Zone I

Figure 9.3 Assumed straight-line failure planes and prismatic zones of triaxial
compression and shear beneath a uniform load Qo of width B.

capacity, of the soil. The soil immediately beneath the foundation is assumed
to be in compression similar to a specimen in a triaxial shear test. The
major principal stress on this zone, II, is equal to the foundation load q0 if
the weight of the soil beneath the footing is neglected. The minor principal
stress on zone II is produced by the resistance of zone I to being compressed.
Zone I is like a triaxial shear specimen lying on its side with the major
principal stress horizontal. At the moment of foundation failure both zones
shear simultaneously, and the minor principal stress on zone II, <J8-n, equals
the major principal stress on zone I, <J1-1.
The minor principal stress on zone I is provided by the average vertical
stress caused by the soil's own dead weight and any surcharge q'. The
surcharge (Fig. 9.4) is any permanent confining pressure above the founda­
tion level such as the weight of a basement floor or the weight of soil above
the foundation level:
(9: l}
The height of the failure zone is B tan at, where at is the angle of the failure
zone, at = 45 + ( f/2). The average minor principal stress due to soil weight
is therefore (yB/2) tan at. The total minor principal stress is
yB
.a.-1 = q, +2 tan at. (9:2a)

If the minor principal stress is known, the major principal stress on zone I

a. Surcharge

=igure 9.4 Surcharge and depth of fou'hdation.

 394 FOUNDATIONS [CH. 9

Prism II

q'+x;. tan«

Figure 9.5 Mohr"s circle analysis of bearing capacity based on straight-line failure
planes and prismatic zones of triaxial compression and shear.

can be found graphically by Mohr's circle (Fig. 9.5). This is essentially

passive earth pressure and it resists the bulging of zone II. Since this· is
equal to the minor principal stress on zone II, a second Mohr circle will give
the major principal stress on zone II, the ultimate bearing capacity:
(9 :2b)
The graphical analysis can be used in any soil, regardless of the shape of the
Mohr envelope. If the Mohr envelope can be approximated by a straight
line of the form
s = c' + p tan cp', (3:32b)
the ultimate bearing capacity can also be derived analytically from the
trigonometry of the Mohr circle (Fig. 9.6):
a 1 - Ga = (--+
--- c' a1 + Ga SIDcp
--- . ,
)
2 tan cp' 2
_ Ga (I + sin. cp') + 2c'(
01 -
cos cp'
. ') •
I -SIDcp' 1-SIDcp
a 1 = Ga ta!l1 0t + 2c' tan at. (9:2c)

01-1 = (q' + r: tan 0t) tan 1 0t + 2c' tan at,

q0=a1-u = r: tan• 0t + 2c' (tan 0t + tan 8 at)+ q' tan' at. (9:2d)

This is a general expression for the ultimate bearing capacity for any soil
with a straight-line Mohr envelope. It can be used for a cohesionless soil
by setting c' = 0 and for a saturated clay in undrained shear by setting
cp' = 0, c = c' and tan 0t = I.

•
SEC. 9:2) STABILITY-BEARING CAPACITY 395

Figure 9.6 Mohr's circle analysis based on a srraight-line Mohr's envelope.

GENERAL BEARING-CAPACITY EQUATION - TERZAGHI­

MEYERHOF / The equation for bearing capacity can be rewritten in a
simple form:

q0 = y: N1 + c'Nc + q'Nq . (9:3)

The symbols N1 , Ne, and Nq are bearing-capacity factors that are functions
of the angle of internal friction. The term containing factor N1 shows the
influence of soil weight and foundation width, that of Ne shows the influence
of the cohesion, and that of Nq shows the influence of the surcharge. The
values of these factors for different values of 'I' (or q,') are given on Fig. 9.7.

300
200
I
N, I Ne J Nq I
100
70
£V 50 -� Meyerhol .... I Meyerhol II
...... Meyerhol-.c-:I-�
0
I/
-; 30
120 I' I
r/ /
I/
.,
Bell�")
.,
i7sell
y
0
V
i,, 10 j I / /I/ V //

·g
ai
7
5
--sell I
7 /
I
I
,,.J - ,,,
J
J
Sensitive-local
failure //
3
2
L Sensitive-local J� (._ Sensitive-local
/ I J failure ',& failure

/
0 10
I I
20· 30 40 0 10 20 30 40 0
I VI
10 20 30 40
Angle of internal friction, ,;

Figure 9.7 Bearing-capacity factors for general bearing-capacity equation.

(Adapted from Meyerhof.9:5)
396 FOUNDATIONS [

This general expression was also derived by Terzaghi''' from a mo

rigorous analysis of bearing capacity. It is based on approximating th
surface of shear by a combination of straight lines and logarithmic spirals
The analysis was later improved by Meyerhof, but the results are express
in the same form. Meyerhof's values for the bearing-capacity factors are-
given on Fig. 9.7.
Both the Terzaghi and the Meyerhof analyses assume the development
of the full shear surface and complete shear failure. However, loose sands
and highly sensitive clays fail by local or progressive shear when local
cracking develops around the foundation or when the cone or wedge of soil
under the foundation forms. Terzaghi suggested an empirical reduction to
the bearing-capacity factors for this condition. The reduced Meyerhof
factors, which apply to sands having a relative density of less than 30 or to
clays with a sensitivity of more than 10, are also shown on Fig. 9.7. Tfie
factors of the simplified Bell analysis fall between the limiting values of tlie
more accurate one.
RECTANGULAR AND CIRCULAR FOUNDATIONS/ Both the
Bell-Terzaghi and the Terzaghi-Meyerhof analyses assume an infinitely
long foundation. When the foundation has a limited length, shear develops
on surfaces at right angles to those previously described, and the bearing­
capacity factors Ne and Ny are changed. Correction factors to be multiplied
by the bearing-capacity factors are given in Table 9:1, where Lis the founda­
tion length and B the width.

TABLE 9: 1 / CORRECTION FACTORS FOR RECTANGULAR

AND CIRCULAR FOUNDATIONS

Shape of Foundation Correction for Ne Correction for Ny

Square 1.25 0.8S

Rectangular L/b = 2 1.12 0.90
L/b = S I.OS 0.9S
Circular• 1.2 0.70

• Use diameter D for width B.

EFFECT OF SOIL PROPERTIES AND FOUNDATION DIMEN­

SIONS/ As can be seen by the g�neral equation, the bearing capacity
depends on the angle of internal friction 'I' (or ,p'), the soil unit weighty, the
foundation width B, the cohesion c (or c:'), and the surcharge q'. The angle
of internal friction has the greatest influence because all three factors increase
rapidly with only small increases in the angle.
If the angle of internal fri�tion is zero, as for a saturated clay in un­
drained shear, the first and third terms become very small and only the
 SEC. 9:2) STABILITY-BEARING CAPACITY 397
ix
cohesion contributes materially to the bearing capacity. Thus for all practical
purposes in a saturated clay,
q0 = cN,; (9:4a)
q0 = 5.2c (for long footings); (9:4b}
q0 = 6.5c (for square footings). (9:4c)
Both the first term and the third term in the equation depend on the
unit weight of the soil. When the shear zone is above the water table (the
bottom of the footing a height of about B above the water), the full soil
unit weight is used in computations. When the water table is at the base of
the foundation, the submerged unit weight, y' = y - y..,, must be used in
the first term. The effect is to reduce that part of the bearing by about one­
half. If the water table is above the bottom of the footing, the surcharge
weight is also affected.
The first term of the equation varies in direct proportion to the founda­
tion width. This means that in cohesionless soils such as sands, the bearing
capacity of small foundations is low and that of large foundations is very
high. Estimating the bearing capacity of sand by small scale tests can be
misleading because the bearing capacity of a full-sized foundation will be
much greater. In saturated clays in undrained shear, foundation width has
little effect on bearing capacity.
The third term is proportional to the surcharge q'. For a saturated clay
where 'I' is zero and N9 = 1, the contribution of surcharge to bearing capacity
is small. In a soil with a high angle of internal friction, a small amount of
surcharge produces a large amount of bearing capacity.
EFFECT OF ECCENTRICITY / If the load is not applied concen­
trically, the overturning moment reduces the bearing capacity. According to
Meyerhof,9'8 the eccentrically loaded foundation responds as if it had a
reduced width, B':
B' =B-2e. (9:5 )
In this expression e is the eccentricity of the resultant of the column load and
the foundation weight, Fig. 9.8a. If there is eccentricity in two directions,

a. Eccentric load b. Soft layer over hard; c. Hard layer over soft,
restricted shear zone load spread out

Figure 9.8 Bearing-capacity with eccentric loads or stratified soils.

398 FOUNDATIONS [CH. 9

both the length and width are reduced according to Equation (9: 5). The
value of qo computed from the reduced width is the average, and is used with
the reduced width again in computing total capacity, Q.
An older method has been to compute the pressure distribution on the
foundation produced by eccentric loading by assuming a linear variation
from one side to the other, similar to the stress distribution in an eccentrically
loaded column. The maximum pressure is then used in computing the safety
factor. This approximation is reasonable for small eccentricities, but the
corrected width of Equation (9: 5) is more realistic.
EFFECT OF INCLINED LOADING / If the loading is not vertical
the shear pattern is altered. The horizontal component of the load increases
the lateral stress on the surrounding zone, leaving less resistance to support
the lateral stress generated by the vertical component of the load. Meyerhof
had proposed corrections to the bearing capacity factors to be used in
computing the ultimate capacity under the vertical component of load.
These are given in Table 9:2:

TABLE 9: 2 / CORRECTIONS FOR INCLINED LOAO9:6

Inclination of Load
From Vertical
Factor o, 0 10 ° 20° 30 °

Ny 0 1.0 o.s 0.2 0

Ny B 1.0 0.6 0.4 0.25
Ne OtoB 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4

NONHOMOGENEOUS BEARING f If the soil is nonhomogeneous,

the analyses are not directly applicable, but reasonable approximations can
be made. When there are random variations inc' and 'I'' or thin repeating
sequences of strata with different 'I' and c parameters within the hypothetical
shear zone, Fig. 9.3, the mean of the c and 'I' can be used. If the range in
variation is more than ±20 per cent of the mean, somewhat higher safety
factors should be used in design.
If a weak stratum overlies a strong one, Fig. 9.8b, the shear will be
confined to the weaker material and the stronger will not be involved in the
failure. The bearing capacity should be computed from the strength of the
weaker stratum. Because the shear zone is restricted, the real bearing will
exceed the computed value.
If a strong layer overlies a weak stratum, the strong layer spreads the
load, reducing the bearing pressure on the weaker material, Fig. 9.8c.
Failure occurs by shear in the softer stratum as the stronger one bends down
under load. The bearing capacity is computed from the strength of the
weaker stratum using a reduced bearing pressure q = tm. computed by the
approximation of Equation (9:6).