Geotech Geol Eng

DOI 10.1007/s10706-017-0233-9

ORIGINAL PAPER

Bearing Capacity Factors of Ring Footings by Using

the Method of Characteristics
Hamed Gholami . Ehsan Seyedi Hosseininia

Received: 27 December 2015 / Accepted: 8 April 2017

Ó Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2017

Abstract Ring footings can be more effective and Keywords Bearing capacity  Ring footing  Method
economical than circular footings. In spite of similar- of characteristics  The principle of superposition
ities between circular and ring footings, their behav-
iors are different in some respects such as bearing
pressure distribution under the footing and settlement. 1 Introduction
But no exclusive theoretical prediction of ultimate
bearing capacity has been reported for ring footings. In As compared with circular footings, the ring footing
the present study, stress characteristics method is can be economically adopted for footing of structures
employed for coding the bearing capacity of ring such as silos, storage tanks, chimneys, and cooling
footing with horizontal ground surface. In the calcu- towers. The theoretical prediction of ultimate bearing
lations, friction at the contact between the soil and capacity of ring footings is a requirement to design
foundation is considered. In this research, the soil such structures. Bearing capacity of foundations
obeys the Mohr–Coulomb yield criterion and that is depends on the shape of the footing, soil parameters
cohesive–frictional-weighted with applied surcharge and loading conditions. Nc, Nq and Nc are bearing
pressure. The bearing capacity factors Nc, Nq and Nc capacity factors which are dimensionless, and are only
for ring footings were calculated by a written code dependent on angle of shear resistance (u). In the
based on the method of characteristics. Bearing literature, bearing capacity factors are calculated in
capacity was determined for different conditions of different conditions and are compared with previous
soil and different ratio of radii in comparison with the studies if possible. Studies on ring footings are rare
principle of superposition results. The findings show and a small number studies has been performed to
that the principle of superposition is effective for compute the bearing capacity of ring footings.
determining the bearing capacity of a ring footing. In previous studies, there are no exact methods to
compute the bearing capacity of ring footings. Kumar
and Ghosh (2005) estimate the value of bearing
H. Gholami (&) capacity factor Nc by employing the method of
Soil Mechanic and Foundation Engineering, Ferdowsi
University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran characteristics for both smooth and rough ring footing
e-mail: [email protected] bases. Zhao and Wang (2008) employ the finite
difference method to compute the Nc for low friction
E. S. Hosseininia soils for smooth and perfectly rough footing bases.
Department of Civil Engineering, Ferdowsi University of
Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran In the present study, the bearing capacity factors
e-mail: [email protected] Nc, Nq and Nc for ring footings are determined by a

123
 Geotech Geol Eng

written code based on the method of characteristics. according to the frictional–cohesive Coulomb rela-
These factors are calculated for two types of soil/foot- tionship as Eq. (1). (cint ) stands for the interface
ing interfaces; smooth and rough. Comprehensive cohesion of the footing base (Eq. 2):
series of bearing capacity factors are presented for
s ¼ cint þ rz tan d ð1Þ
different ratio of internal radius to external radius of
the ring footings and a wide range of internal friction tan d
angle. Also bearing capacity is calculated with simul- cint ¼ c ð2Þ
tan /
taneous effects of unit weight (c), surcharge (q), and
the soil cohesion (c) and the results are compared with As a result, the stress points (rz, srz) just beneath the
the superposition method. footing base should satisfy both the interface and soil
failure criteria. If the friction angle (d) between soil
and base is fully mobilized, the angle between the
2 Problem Definition direction of the major principal stress and the normal
to the footing is computed as:
This study problem is shown in Fig. 1, where a rigid   
1 sin d
ring footing with internal and external radii ri and ro w ¼  d þ sin1 ð3Þ
2 sin /
respectively, is illustrated. The footing rests on a
frictional–cohesive medium including a horizontal The smooth footing condition is an ideal case. In
ground surface. In the present study, different radii reality, footings are usually constructed by pouring
ratios (n = ri/ro) are examined. The footing supports concrete directly on a firm surface of soil or lean
vertical and central load. concrete, and the footing-soil interface is rough
The uniform normal surcharge pressure is loaded enough to restrain the tendency for slip. The lowest
on the ground surface besides the footing and there is value of the interface friction angle occurs for a
not any shear stress. Along the footing base, (d) is the parabolic concave variation (Eq. 4). In the present
angle of interface friction. The value of the angle (d) study, it is supposed that the interface friction angle (d)
depends on the roughness of the footing-soil. For a varies along the centerline to edge of footing with a
smooth base (d) is zero but footings are usually rough parabolic concave form as a function of soil friction
in reality. Shear stress (s) for a rough footing is angle (/):

Fig. 1 The plan of ring

footing

ro
ri

Rigid Ring Footing

123
Geotech Geol Eng

 2 orr osrz rr  rh
r þ þ ¼0
d¼ / ð ri \r\ro Þ ð4Þ or oz r
ro ð5Þ
osrz orz srz
þ þ ¼c
or oz r
3 Methodology
In the present study, it is assumed that the soil obeys
The method of characteristics transforms a set of the Mohr–Coulomb yield criterion as a frictional–
hyperbolic differential equations into a system of cohesive material. The inclination angle (w) is
ordinary differential equations. These equations are between the major principal surface and the vertical
then solved by the finite difference method. This direction. The three stress components (rz, rr, srz) can
method is used to determine the stresses in the soil mass be expressed as follows:
by plastic behavior. Under loading, soil beneath the rr þ rz
foundation reaches limit yield and plastic flow occurs s¼ ð6Þ
2
in the soil mass. In most problems of soil mechanics,
soil plastic behavior is defined by Mohr–Coulomb rr ¼s ð1 þ sin / cos 2wÞ þ c cos / cos 2w
yield criterion. Differential equation system called the rz ¼ s ð1  sin / cos 2wÞ  c cos / cos 2w ð7Þ
plastic equilibrium equation is established by combin-
srz ¼ sin 2w ðc cos / þ s sin /Þ
ing this criteria with equilibrium equations. If these
equations are solved by considering the boundary In axisymmetric problems, the hoop stress (rh) is
conditions, the stress to the soil mass will be calculated. generally supposed to be either the major or minor
The pioneering method of characteristics is principal stress in the axial plane (Haar and von
employed by Kötter (1903) for plane rotation. Prandtl Karman 1909). This assumption has also been
(1921) offers analytical solution for the foundation of accepted by Cox et al. (1961) and Lau (1988).
the weightless soil. Reissner (1924) adopts the method Accordingly, (rh) is considered equal to the smallest
of Prandtl (1921) for measuring the bearing capacity of principal stress:
soil in different situations. The issue becomes compli-
rh ¼ r3 \r1
cated by extending this method to weighted soil. The ð8Þ
main solutions are proposed by Sokolovski (1965). rh ¼ sð1  sin /Þ
Solving the problem of ring footings takes place in By considering Eqs. (5), (6), (7) and (8), hyperbolic
an axial symmetric condition. According to Fig. 2, the partial differential equations are formed. During the
stress components (rz, rr, rh, srz) of an element in problem solving, two groups of characteristic lines are
cylindrical coordinates system (r–h–z) are considered. obtained (Davis and Selvadurai 2002):
The equations of equilibrium under axisymmetric
conditions can be written in the following form: dr
¼ tanðw  lÞ ð9Þ
dz
where l = p/4 - u/2 and the upper and lower signs
correspond to characteristic lines. Along each of these
two lines, the equilibrium is satisfied for stress
components. By substituting Eq. (7) in the set of
partial differential equations, two ordinary differential
equations are expressed:
 
cos /dr  ðsin /  1Þdz
cos /dr  ðc cos / þ s sin /Þ 2dw þ
r
þ ð cos /dz  sin /drÞc ¼ 0
ð10Þ
The general scheme of the characteristic lines under
the footing zone (drawn by authors’s code) is shown in
Fig. 2 Stress components in the cylindrical coordinates system

123
 Geotech Geol Eng

Fig. 3. This scheme consists of three zones: The active Due to non-linear behavior of ground material,
zone (under the footing), the passive zone (vicinity of using traditional superposition methods of calculating
the footing) and the fan zone (Booker and Davis 1977). bearing capacity causes error. The main cause of
The program code is written based on the Eqs. (9) superposition error is decomposition of the total
and (10). Values of pressure are calculated along the bearing capacity into components. Based on the
base of the ring footing. Pressure distribution under the method of characteristics, the error introduced by
foundation is not uniform. The average pressure is superposition method is investigated. Solving several
obtained by the following Eq. (11). In this equation, problems showed that bearing capacity calculated by
there is pressure on the foundation (rz), foundation superposition method is conservative (Bolton and Lau
radius (r), inner radius (ri), outer radius (ro). By the 1993; Davis and Booker 1971).
following equations, the mean vertical bearing capac- In the present study, each of the bearing capacity
ity (qu) of the ring foundation is calculated. factors has been determined in conditions where two
X
ro terms of the Eq. (12) must become zero and only one
Qu ¼ 2 p r rz of them has to remain in the calculation. In order to
ri
ð11Þ determine the factor Nc, the problem is solved for
Qu weighted cohesionless soil (c = 0) without any
qu ¼  2 
p ro  ri2 surcharge on the ground surface. At present, Eq. (13)
is used for calculating the factor Nc, Noting that to
Soil is considered as cohesive–frictional-weighted avoid floating error, surcharge (q) must be considered
with applied surcharge pressure. Bearing capacity (qu) near the zero. In order to compute the factor Nq, the
of a ring footing is expressed by the classical bearing soil is supposed to be weightless and cohesionless.
capacity equation. The ultimate bearing capacity of Instead; there is a uniform surcharge over the ground
the soil under a shallow footing is expressed by the surface. To continue, by using Eq. (14) the Nq is
Terzaghi’s classical Eq. (12). calculated. Factor Nc can be assessed by taking the
qu ¼ cNc þ qNq þ cðro  ri ÞNc ð12Þ cohesive weightless soil and without any surcharge on
the ground surface. The Eq. (15) is used to obtain the
The first term in this equation relates to the shear Nc.
strength component represented by parameter (c), the
qu
second term is attributed to the surcharge pressure Nc ¼ ð13Þ
(q) and the third term is associated with the weight of cðro  ri Þ
the soil below foundation level. The superposition of qu
components of bearing capacity is theoretically incor- Nq ¼ ð14Þ
q
rect for a plastic material but the resulting error is
considered to be on the safe side. Bearing capacity qu
Nc ¼ ð15Þ
factors of ring footing are obtained for different ratios c
of inner radius to the outer radius.

Fig. 3 The global ro

scheme of the characteristics ri
lines generated under the σz q
ring footing zone, (figure is CL
r
from authors’s code)

Footing
Passive Zone
Active Zone

Fan Zone
z

123
Geotech Geol Eng

4 Results obtained for the axisymmetric ring footing problem.

This can be explained by paying attention to the shear
The values of the bearing capacity factors Nc, Nq and stress beneath the rough footing base, which diverts
Nc are computed based on the quantities of ri =r0 ¼ the directions of characteristic lines to be more
0; 0:25; 0:5; 0:7; 0:9 and a wide range of internal extended than the smooth footing base.
friction angles (/ = 5°–50°) with intervals of 5°. When the soil is weightless (i.e., c = 0), the
These factors are derived for smooth and rough extension of characteristic lines does not influence
footings as shown in Tables 1, 2 and 3. The magni- the stress values [see Eq. (10)], but the existence of
tudes of the bearing capacity factors for a rough unit weight as a body force inside the soil leads to the
footing are more than a smooth footing base. change the stress Mohr circles.
In plane strain footing problem, the footing rough- Figures 4 and 5 shows global scheme of the
ness has no effect on the value of Nq and Nc (Chen characteristic lines generated under the footing zone
1975). In the present study, different results are separately to calculate Nc and Nq (or Nc).

Table 1 Values of Nc for smooth and rough ring footing

/ (°) Nc
Smooth, ri/ro Rough, ri/ro
0 0.25 0.5 0.7 0.9 0 0.25 0.5 0.7 0.9

5 0.06 0.05 0.04 0.03 0.01 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.03 0.01
10 0.21 0.18 0.13 0.08 0.03 0.27 0.24 0.19 0.12 0.05
15 0.53 0.47 0.33 0.21 0.07 0.76 0.69 0.54 0.36 0.14
20 1.27 1.10 0.78 0.47 0.16 1.96 1.79 1.41 0.97 0.39
25 2.97 2.60 1.80 1.07 0.36 4.99 4.56 3.63 2.55 1.05
30 7.11 6.06 4.13 2.44 0.80 12.76 11.68 9.38 6.69 2.81
35 18.11 15.27 10.27 6.15 2.05 36.86 34.15 28.35 21.01 9.19
40 49.87 41.97 28.77 16.00 5.13 113.01 105.16 88.74 66.99 29.76
45 159.90 129.00 84.00 45.00 14.95 450.49 430.10 380.66 304.86 142.48
50 615.39 508.45 319.66 170.18 48.77 2008.99 1824.40 1725.60 1145.0 708.70

Table 2 Values of Nq for smooth and rough ring footing

/ (°) Nq
Smooth, ri/ro Rough, ri/ro
0 0.25 0.5 0.7 0.9 0 0.25 0.5 0.7 0.9

5 1.65 1.64 1.63 1.61 1.58 1.69 1.68 1.66 1.64 1.62
10 2.76 2.73 2.67 2.60 2.52 2.95 2.92 2.85 2.78 2.69
15 4.72 4.64 4.47 4.30 4.08 5.20 5.11 4.93 4.74 4.50
20 8.31 8.11 7.71 7.28 6.74 9.60 9.37 8.91 8.41 7.79
25 15.23 14.77 13.83 12.80 11.51 18.31 17.76 16.62 15.39 13.84
30 29.45 28.32 25.99 23.56 20.47 37.40 35.96 33.00 29.93 26.00
35 61.12 58.57 52.69 46.44 38.64 81.78 78.37 70.50 62.14 51.69
40 139.17 132.35 116.81 99.31 79.10 180.92 172.06 151.85 129.10 102.84
45 359.13 337.89 289.23 242.61 180.85 498.47 468.99 401.45 336.74 251.02
50 1098.80 1021.10 867.20 698.30 480.70 1516.30 1409.20 1196.80 963.63 663.31

123
 Geotech Geol Eng

Table 3 Values of Nc for smooth and rough ring footing

/ (°) Nc
Smooth, ri/ro Rough, ri/ro
0 0.25 0.5 0.7 0.9 0 0.25 0.5 0.7 0.9

5 7.44 7.35 7.15 6.92 6.65 7.85 7.77 7.56 7.33 7.05
10 9.99 9.84 9.48 9.11 8.64 11.05 10.87 10.50 10.10 9.60
15 13.87 13.58 12.96 12.33 11.50 15.68 15.35 14.66 13.96 13.05
20 20.07 19.84 18.71 17.47 15.81 23.64 23.02 21.73 20.38 18.67
25 30.49 29.56 27.53 25.32 22.55 37.14 35.96 33.53 30.87 27.54
30 49.28 47.92 45.44 40.85 33.77 63.09 60.60 55.47 50.13 43.33
35 85.86 82.27 73.87 64.94 53.78 115.44 110.56 99.32 87.37 72.45
40 164.81 156.65 138.12 117.25 93.15 214.58 204.00 179.91 152.78 121.45
45 358.21 337.16 288.46 241.80 179.99 497.87 468.36 400.77 336.01 250.22
50 922.44 856.76 727.51 585.61 399.85 1272.60 1182.60 1004.30 808.47 556.24

Fig. 4 The scheme of the ro

characteristics lines ri
generated under the footing
σz
CL
zone, Nc (n = 0.5, figure is
from authors’s code)
0 r
0.2
Footing
Passive Zone
0.4
Active Zone
Fan Zone
0.6

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8

z

5 Comparison (1993), and Zhao and Wang (2008) in the assumed

rough conditions. Bolton and Lau (1993), and Zhao
5.1 Nc and Wang (2008) considered a full rough base but
others a linear or nonlinear variation of angle of
In order to verify the accuracy of the written code to interface friction considered from the centerline to
calculate the Nc of ring footing, the values of Nc for edge of footing. The interface friction angle increases
the circular footing (ri = 0) with smooth and rough from zero at the axis of symmetry to the outer edge of
base are compared with Bolton and Lau (1993), the footing.
Cassidy and Houlsby (2002), Kumar and Ghosh The computed values of Nc for smooth and rough
(2005), and Zhao and Wang (2008) in Table 4. The ring footing with various range of (/) and (ri/ro) are
results of the present study indicate that the values for compared with Kumar and Ghosh (2005) and Zhao
smooth base are very close to those of the previous and Wang (2008). A comparison of all these results is
studies. About the circular footing with rough base, the shown in Figs. 6 and 7. As mentioned earlier for
results of the present study are close to Cassidy and smooth condition, results are close to each other. But
Houlsby (2002) and Kumar and Ghosh (2005) but due to different conditions for interface angle, the
there is considerable difference with Bolton and Lau results are different for rough condition.

123
Geotech Geol Eng

ro
ri
σz
CL
0
r
0.1
0.2 Footing
0.3
Active Zone
0.4
Passive Zone
0.5
0.6 Fan Zone

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.1
z
Fig. 5 The scheme of the characteristics lines generated under the footing zone, Nq or Nc (n = 0.5, figure is from authors’s code)

Table 4 Comparison of Nc values for circular footing with smooth and rough base
/ Nc
(°)
Smooth Rough
Present Bolton Cassidy and Kumar and Zhao and Present Bolton Cassidy and Kumar and Zhao and
study and Lau Houlsby Ghosh Wang study and Lau Houlsby Ghosh Wang
(1993) (2002) (2005) (2008) (1993) (2002) (2005) (2008)

5 0.06 0.06 0.06 – – 0.07 0.68 0.07 – 0.67

10 0.20 0.21 0.20 0.21 0.21 0.27 1.37 0.27 0.27 1.35
15 0.53 0.60 0.55 0.55 – 0.76 2.83 0.80 – 2.79
20 1.26 1.30 1.22 1.28 1.31 1.96 6.04 2.16 6.04 5.68
25 2.97 3.00 2.86 3.00 – 4.99 13.50 5.27 – 13.36
30 7.11 7.10 6.93 7.13 7.26 12.76 31.90 14.13 12.79 30.76
35 18.11 18.20 17.88 18.30 – 36.90 82.40 42.56 – –
40 49.90 51.00 50.50 50.00 – 113.00 238.00 129.40 111.05 –
45 159.90 160.00 165.10 160.00 – 450.50 803.00 505.20 – –
50 615.30 621.00 703.10 620.00 – 2008.20 3403.00 2050.00 1934.40 –

5.2 Nq Craig (1995), Houlsby and Martin (2003), Chakra-

borty and Kumar (2015) in Table 6. The rough values
In order to verify the accuracy of the written code to are greater than smooth values. Also there is no similar
calculate the Nq of ring footing, the computed values study (like Nq) to compare values of ring footing with
of Nq for the circular footing (ri = 0) with smooth and the present study.
rough base, are compared with Bolton and Lau (1993)
in Table 5. The results of smooth base are very close in
6 Derived Equations
these studies. It is worth noting that, there was no
similar study to compare Nq values for ring footing
By analyzing the computed results of bearing capacity
with the present study.
factors for ring footing, two equations are suggested.
  
5.3 Nc Nq  exp 6:25  n2 tan 0:96/ ð16Þ

Nc  0:35ð1  nÞðn þ 1:5ÞNq tan 0:9/ ð17Þ

The Nc values for the circular footing (ri = 0) with a
smooth and rough base over cohesive soil are Also the relation between Nq and Nc is checked. The
compared with Houlsby and Wroth (1982), Tani and computed values of Nc from relation (18) is

123
 Geotech Geol Eng

Fig. 6 Comparison of
smooth Nc values from this
study with the previous
studies

50 o

40 o
N

30 o

20 o

10 o

ri ro

50 o

N 40 o

30 o

20 o

10 o

ri ro

Fig. 7 Comparison of rough Nc values from this study with the previous studies

completely equal to values from the written code in the Terzaghi (1943) proposes Eq. (12) to calculate the
present study. bearing capacity of foundations by considering the
principle of superposition. Note that principle of
Nc ¼ ðNq  1Þcot/ ð18Þ
superposition is a conservative method to obtain
bearing capacity. In order to verify the accuracy of
7 Principle of Superposition the written code to calculate the bearing capacity, a
comparison between the Superposition method (by
By considering the frictional–cohesive-weighted soil, using the bearing capacity factors) and the direct
bearing capacity is calculated by the written code. results of written code, for ri = 0 (circular footing) is
Two problems are defined for each of smooth and shown in Table 8. The average differences of bearing
rough bases of ring footings. The parameters for these capacity in these methods are 10%. In the present
problems are shown in Table 7. study, by superposing the calculated bearing capacity

123
Geotech Geol Eng

Table 5 Comparison of Nq values for circular footing with bearing capacity factors). So by using the calculated
smooth and rough base bearing capacity factors in superposition method, the
/ (°) Present study Bolton and Lau bearing capacity of ring footings can be calculated as a
conservative method.
Smooth Rough Smooth and rough

5 1.65 7.85 1.65

10 2.76 11.05 2.80 8 Conclusion
15 4.72 15.68 4.70
20 8.31 23.64 8.30 The method of characteristics is employed to trans-
25 15.23 37.14 15.20 form a hyperbolic differential equations into a system
30 29.45 63.09 29.50 of ordinary differential equations. These equations
35 61.12 115.44 61.00 form the coding basis for calculating the bearing
40 139.20 214.58 140.00 capacity of ring footings with smooth and rough bases.
45 359.10 497.87 359.00 In this study, the soil obeys the Mohr–Coulomb yield
50 1099.00 1272.70 1103.00 creation and this soil is cohesive–frictional including
unit weight and surcharge. Nc, Nq and Nc are bearing
capacity factors which are determined for different
conditions of soil. In the present study, comprehensive
Table 6 Comparison of Nc values for the smooth and rough
series of bearing capacity factors are presented for
circular footing
different ratio of internal radius to external radius of
Rough Smooth Studies the ring footings and a wide range of internal friction
6.04 5.69 Present study angle.
6.05 5.69 Houlsby and Wroth (1982) By analysis of these values, some equations are
6.34 5.69 Tani and Craig (1995) suggested for these factors. The findings demonstrate
6.05 5.69 Houlsby and Martin (2003)
that by using the calculated bearing capacity factors in
6.04 – Chakraborty and Jyant Kumar (2015)
superposition equation, the bearing capacity of ring
foundation can be determined. The average differ-
ences of bearing capacity in these methods are 10%.
This study compares Nc values of ring footing with
factors (and the parameters from Table 7) in Eq. (12), those of previous studies but there were no similar
the bearing capacity of ring footing is measured. In studies about Nq and Nc of ring footing to compare.
Fig. 8a, b, c, d, the results of bearing capacity by using Hence, the calculated bearing capacity factors Nq and
the superposition method (Eq. 12), comparison with Nc by written code for circular footings (ri = 0) are
the direct result of the written code (without using the compared with others studies.

Table 7 The parameters for problem 1 and 2

Problem number ro (m) q ðkPaÞ c ðkN=m3 Þ /ð Þ c ðkPaÞ

1 3.5 100 19 35 10
2 10 0 18 30 10

Table 8 Comparison of bearing capacity of problem 1 and 2 for circular foundation

Method of analysis Smooth base Rough base
Problem 1 (MPa) Problem 2 (MPa) Problem 1 (MPa) Problem 2 (MPa)

Method of characteristics 3.79 1.31 11.88 2.01

Principle of superposition 3.66 1.13 10.56 1.79

123
 Geotech Geol Eng

(a) References
Bearing capacity (MPa)

4
Bolton MD, Lau CK (1993) Vertical bearing capacity factors for
circular and strip footings on Mohr–Coulomb soil. Can
Geotech J 30:1024–1033
Booker JR, Davis EH (1977) Numerical methods in geotech-
nical engineering, Chapter 21. McGraw-Hill
0 Cassidy MJ, Houlsby GT (2002) Vertical bearing capacity
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 factors for conical footings on sand. Géotechnique
ri ro 52(9):687–692
(b) Chakraborty D, Kumar J (2015) Bearing capacity of circular
footings on reinforced soils. Int J Geomech
Bearing capacity (MPa)

1.5
15(1):04014034
1
Chen WF (1975) Limit analysis and soil plasticity. Elsevier,
Amsterdam
Cox AD, Eason G, Hopkins HG (1961) Axially symmetric
0.5 plastic deformation in soils. Proc R Soc Lond Ser A
254:1–45
0 Davis EH, Booker JR (1971) The bearing capacity of strip
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
foorings from the standpoint of plasticity theory. In: Con-
ri ro
ference in Geomechanic, Melbourne, pp 276–282
(c) Davis RO, Selvadurai APS (2002) Plasticity and geomechanics.
16 Cambridge University Press, New York
Bearing capacity (MPa)

Haar A, von Karman T (1909) Zur theorie der spannungs-zus-

12
taende in plastichen und sandartigen medien. Nachrichten
8 von der königlichen gesellschaft der wissenschaften.
Göttingen. Math-phys, Klasse, p 204
Method of Characteristic
4 Houlsby GT, Martin CM (2003) Undrained bearing capacity
Superposition factors for conical footings on clay. Géotechnique
0 53(5):513–520
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 Houlsby GT, Wroth CP (1982) Direct solution of plasticity
ri ro
problem in soil by the method of characteristic. In: Pro-
(d) ceedings of the 4th international conference on numerical
3 methods in geomechanics, vol 3. Edmonton,
Bearing capacity (MPa)

pp 1059–1071
2 Kötter F (1903) Die Bestimmung des Drucks an gekrümmten
Gleitfla chen, eine Aufgabe aus der Lehre vom Erddruck,
1
Sitzungsberichte der Akademie der WissenschaftenBerlin,
Method of Characteristic 229–233
Superposition Kumar J, Ghosh P (2005) Bearing capacity factor Nc for ring
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
footings using the method of characteristics. Can Geotech J
ri ro
40(3):1474–1484
Lau CK (1988) Scale effect in tests on footing, Ph.D. Thesis,
University of Cambridge
Fig. 8 Comparison of the written code with superposition
Prandtl L (1921) Über die Eindringungs festigkeit (Härte)
principle for a problem 1 (smooth base), b problem 2 (smooth
plastischer Baustoffe und die Festigkeit von Schneiden.
base), c problem 1 (rough base), d problem 2 (rough base)
Zeit Angew Math Mech 1:15–20
Reissner H (1924) Zum Erddruckproblem, In: Proceedings of
Moreover, Bolton and Lau (1993) point out that the 1 st international conference on applied mechanics,
the Nq is same for smooth and rough circular Delft, pp 295–311
Sokolovski VV (1965) Statics of granular media. Pergamon
foundation, unlike the present study. Hence, Nq and Press, London
Nc are calculated for a wide range of internal Tani K, Craig WH (1995) Bearing capacity of circular foun-
friction angles and different geometric conditions of dations on soft clay of strength increasing with depth. Soils
ring foundation. Found 35(4):21–35
Terzaghi K (1943) Theoretical soil mechanics. Wiley, New
Finally, using values of the bearing capacity factors York
of ring foundation leads to the exact calculation of the Zhao L, Wang JH (2008) Vertical bearing capacity for ring
bearing capacity and optimal economic design. footing. Comput Geotech 35(2):292–304

123