Shallow Foundations

1.3.1. Footing Design (Review)

Lecture Note Page 1

Shallow Foundations

1.4. Design (Principle of Foundation, Alemayehu, 2008, pp-103-115)

1.4.1. Footing Foundation

After picking up the allowable soil pressure as for a given soil one may determine the area and subsequently
the proportions of a footing necessary to sustain a given load or a combination of loads as indicated in Fig.
5.1a.

The allowable soil pressure, as is substituted in place of max of Eq. (3.9). Thus

P 6e 6e
 as  (1  b  a ) (5.1)
A b a

Where

P = loaded sustained by the footing

A = a b = area of footing

a = length of footing

b = width of footing.

The designer should fix the geometric shape (square, rectangle, circle) and the ratio between a and b of the
footing prior to the application of Eq.(5.1). Since all other quantities in Eq.(5.1) are known, one readily
determines the area A of the footing.

Lecture Note Page 2

Shallow Foundations

y M

a P

My

P Mx
b x t

max = P/A ( 1 +b6 b. e a+ 6 a. e ) , A b= a . b , a e = Mx

p

, e = My
p
The dimensions a and b should be selected so that max = as
a) Proportioning of footing using presumptive allowable soil pressures

M M

P P

g1 b b
t
t

.
.

0 0 0
g2 45 .
45 . 45 - /2
.

o
o
rf 45 - /2 45 - /2

r0 a
r r0
rf
r
failure surface
arc of a circle
r = ro = rf
log. spiral
a tan 
r = ro . e

( i ) Initial condition -soil parameters ( ii ) Final condition - soil parameters

( Short - term loading ) ( Long - term loading )
u ( mostly = o ) , cu ' , c'

b) Proportioning of footing using soil parameters ' and c' [ 7 ]

Fig.5.1: Proprtioning of footings

5.1.2. Proportioning of Footings Using the Soil Strength Parameters  and c

For cases where presumptive allowable soil pressures cannot be used, one should determine the soil strength
parameters  and c. These parameters may be approximated (Art. 1.3) or determined from laboratory tests.
If the nature of the project calls for relatively accurate determination of  and c, one should carry out a
series of triaxial tests on undisturbed samples taken from several points. Using the value of and c thus
obtained, one can easily determine the area of the foundation in question using bearing capacity equations
[7,18].

In applying the bearing capacity equations one should differentiate two states of loading, namely, the initial
or instantaneous loading condition and the final or long-term loading condition.

Lecture Note Page 3

Shallow Foundations

In the initial loading condition, the load is assumed to act instantaneously. At this stage the pore water
pressure in the soil does not have time to dissipate. This situation corresponds to the quick or undrained
test condition of the triaxial test. The soil parameters are designated by u and cu – in most cases u = 0
(Fig. 5.1b).

In the final or long-term loading condition, the load is assumed to act gradually as construction progresses,
thus giving the pore water pressure in the soil ample time to dissipate. Here the situation corresponds to
the slow or drained test condition of the triaxial test. The soil parameters in this case are designated by 
and c (Fig. 5.1b).

When one compares the respective magnitudes of the soil parameters, one finds that cu is much bigger than
c, and u – if not equal to zero – is much less than .

The ultimate load that may be applied on a foundation with sides a and b may be determined from the
following equation:

V f  A  f (5.2)

where

A = ab = effective area

a = a - 2 ea = effective length [14]

b = b - 2 eb = effective width

f = ultimate bearing capacity of the footing

ea = eccentricity in the x -direction (Fig 5.1a)

eb = eccentricity in its y-direction

The actual sustained load on the footing may be related to the ultimate load.

Vf  n  P (5.3)

where

 = factor of safety

P = actual sustained load on the foundation

Lecture Note Page 4

Shallow Foundations

One may then express (Eq. 5.2) as:

  P  A   f (5.4)

From which it follows:

P
A  (5.5)
f

From Eq. (5.5) one easily determines the required areas since all the quantities on the right-hand side of the
equation are known.

The ultimate bearing capacity, f, may be determined from the following equation as proposed by DIN
4017 [7.18]:

 f  c  N c  xc  vc   1  t  N t  xt  vt   2  b  N b  xb  vb (5.6)

where

c = cohesion

t = foundation depth

Nc , Nt , Nb = bearing capacity coefficients: functions of 

x c , xt , xb = inclination coefficients: functions of  and c

vc , vt , vb = shape factors: function of ratio b/a

 1, 2 = unit weight of soil above and below the foundation level respectively.

For initial loading conditions, where u = 0, the failure surface of the soil consists of straight line and an
arc of a circle as indicated is Fig. 5.1b. The bearing capacity coefficients would have the values Nc = 5.1,
Nt 1, Nb = 0[18].

 f  (5.1) c  xc  vc   1  t  xt  vt (5.7)

5.1.3 Structural Considerations

The dimensioning of the footings discussed in 5.1.1 and 5.1.2 is based solely on the bearing capacity of the
soil. Before going into the structural design, one should check if the settlement of the selected footing is

Lecture Note Page 5

Shallow Foundations

within the prescribed safe limits. If the settlement exceeds the safe limits, one should increase the
dimensions of the footings until the danger of settlement is eliminated.

The last stage in the design of foundations is the structural design. One should check the adequacy of the
thickness of the footing and provide the necessary reinforcement to withstand punching shear, diagonal
tension (wide beam shear), bending moment and bond stress. One may apply the Working Stress Design
(WSD) method or the Ultimate Limit State Design (ULSD) method depending upon the specific
requirement of the prevailing code.

The Ethiopian Building Code [EBCS-2] has adopted the Ultimate Limit State Design (ULSD) method. The
working Stress Design (WSD) method is gradually being phased out. Nevertheless it would be beneficial
to have the WSD method at one’s disposal. For this reason the allowable stresses for WSD according to
ACI – Code[2] are presented below..

5.1.3.1 Allowable Stresses According to the WSD-Method ACI-Code[2]

(i) Punching Shear

vcp  0.53 f c (kg/cm2) (5.8)

(ii) Diagonal Tension

vcd  0.29 f c (kg/cm2) (5.9)

(iii) Bond Stress

3.23 f c
u  35.2(kg/cm2) for bottom bars (5.10)


2.29 f c
u  24.6(kg/cm2) for top bars (5.11)


(iv) Development (embedment) Length

as  f s
d  (cm) (5.12)
p u


kg is used as a unit of force

Lecture Note Page 6

Shallow Foundations

In the above equations:

f c = crushing strength of concrete – cylindrical sample

15cm diameter, 30cm length

 = diameter of reinforcing bar (cm)

as = area of reinforcing bar (cm2)

fs = allowable stress of the reinforcing bar (kg/cm2)

p = perimeter of the reinforcing bar(cm)

u = allowable bond stress (kg/cm2)

 d = development length(cm).

5.1.3.2 Shear Resistance According to EBSC-2 [9]

(i) Punching Shear Resistance

VRd1  0.25 f ctd k1k 2 ud (MN) (5.13)

where k 1 (1  50 e )  2.0

k 2  1 .6  d  1 .0 (d in meters)

For members where more than 50% of the bottom reinforcement is curtailed, k 2  1

dx  dy
d
2

 e   ex   ey 1 / 2  0.015

 ex and  ey correspond to the geometric ratios longitudinal reinforcement parallel to x and y

respectively.

d is the average effective height in the x and y directions.

(ii) Wide Beam Shear Resistance

Lecture Note Page 7

Shallow Foundations

VRd  0.25 f ctd k1k 2 bw d (MN) (5.14)

where k 1 (1  50  )  2.0

k 2  1 .6  d  1 (d in meters)

For members where more than 50% of the bottom reinforcement is curtailed, k 2  1

As

bw d

iii) Development Length

  f yd
d  (cm) (5.20)
4  f bd

f yk
f yd  : f bd  f ctd
s

0.35 f ck
f ctd
c

The terms in the above equation are defined as follows[9]

As = area of tension reinforcement (m2)

bw = width of web or rib of a member (m)

d = the distance from extreme compression to centroid of tension reinforcement (m)

f bd = design bond strength (MPa)

f ck = characteristic compressive strength of concrete – cubic sample 15 x 15 x 15cm (MPa)

f ctd = design tensile strength of concrete (MPa)

f yd = design yield strength of reinforcement (MPa)

Lecture Note Page 8

Shallow Foundations

f yk = characteristic yield strength of reinforcement (MPa)

u = periphery of critical section (m)

 c = partial safety factor for concrete

 s = partial safety factor for steel

 = geometrical ratio of reinforcement

e = effective geometrical ratio of reinforcement

 ex = geometrical ratio of reinforcement in the x direction

 ey = geometrical ratio of reinforcement in the y direction

 = diameter of reinforcement bar (m)

5.2 Isolated or Spread Footings

5.2.1 Proportioning of Footing

5.2.1.1 Proportioning of Footing using the Presumptive Allowable Soil Pressure

The required area of the footing and subsequently the proportions will be determined from Eq. (5.1).

5.2.1.2 Proportioning of Footing using the Soil Strength Parameters  and c

If the soil parameter  and c are given, one applies the procedure described in 5.1.2 for determining the area
of the footing under question.

5.2.2 Structural Design

5.2.2.1 Punching Shear

This factor generally controls the depth of footings. It is the normal practice to provide adequate depth to
sustain the shear stress developed without reinforcement. The critical section that is to be considered is

Lecture Note Page 9

Shallow Foundations

indicated in Fig. 5.2a. For a given average soil pressure one may derive expressions for determining the
depth of footing accessory to withstand a given load.

Lecture Note Page 10

Shallow Foundations

b' + d critical section

WSD
A b' A
a'

a a' + d d/2

Column

d/2 d/2 critical section

b'

d D

Average soil pressure

section A - A

a) Critical section for punching shear WSD - method

critical section
ULSD
A b' A

a a' + 3d a' 1.5d

b' + 3d Column

1.5d 1.5d critical section

b'

d D

section A - A Average soil pressure

b) Critical section for punching shear ULSD - method

Lecture Note Page 11

Shallow Foundations

b b

critical section critical section

WSD ULSD
A a' A A a' A

a a' + d d/2 a

a' + 3d 1.5d

Column Column

c) Critical section for punching shear WSD - method d) Critical section for punching shear ULSD - method

b P
C
b'
d d

0 d D
D D 45 450
d b' B
B

a a' d section B - B
Average soil pressure

C
e) critical section for diagonal tension

Fig. 5.2 : Critical sections that are considered for

determining depth of footings according to WSD and ULSD

Lecture Note Page 12

Shallow Foundations

For simplicity, consider an axial load P. The bearing pressure as the result of the axial load would be
uniformly distributed and is designated by .

From the figure it is apparent that the concrete shear resistance along the perimeter according to EBCS-2
[9] would be

2a   3d  b   3d  d . (2.16)

where v = punching shear, resistance

= vcp for WSD method

= vup for ULSD method

The net force on the perimeter due to the soil pressure would be

{a  b  [(a  3d ) (b  3 d )]}  (5.17)

In this expression the magnitude of  may vary according to the method of calculation. By the WSD
method it will be the allowable bearing pressure, and by ULSD it is the ultimate bearing pressure value.

From equilibrium consideration, Eq. (5.16) and Eq. (5.17) should be equal. From the resulting equation
one would be in a position to determine the required effective depth of the foundation.

2[a  d  b  d ]  d  v  = {a  b  [(a  d ) (b  d )]}  (5.18)

Eq. (5.18) may be written as follows:

d 2 (12v  9 )  d (2v  3 ) (a  b)  (ab  ab) (5.19)

or

d 2 (12v  9 )  d ( 2v  3 ) ( a   b )  ( Afooting  Acolumn ) (5.20)

For square columns with a  b , Eq. (5.20) would become

d 2 (12v  9 )  d ( 2v  3 ) 2a   ( Afooting  Acolumn ) (5.21)

For circular columns with diameter of a  , Eq. (5.20) becomes

d 2 (3v  2.25 )  da (  1.5 )  ( Afooting  Acolumn ) (5.22)

In Eq. (5.18) to Eq. (5.22), all quantities with exception of d are known. By solving one of the equations
the effective depth necessary to sustain the punching shear may be determined.

Lecture Note Page 13

Shallow Foundations

5.2.2.2 Diagonal Tension (Wide Beam Shear)

The selected depth using the punching shear criterion may not be adequate to withstand the diagonal tension
developed. Hence one should also c heck the safety against diagonal tension. The critical sections that
should be considered are given in Fig. 5.2b.

The shear forces are calculated along the plane C - C and D - D (Fig. 5.2b)

b b
VC  C  (  d  ) a (5.23)
2 2

a a
VD  D  (  d  ) b (5.24)
2 2

The appropriate magnitude of  should be used depending upon the method of calculation.

The actual shear stress is then calculated from

VC  C
vC  C  (5.25)
ad

VD  D
vD  D  (5.26)
bd

These calculated actual shear stresses should be compared with the allowable stress vcd or vud depending
upon whether one uses the WSD method or the ULSD method respectively.

5.2.2.3 Bending Moment

The critical sections for the bending moment vary according to the type of columns. For concrete columns
the critical section is indicated in Fig. 5.3a. For masonry and steel columns the critical sections are given
in Fig. 5.3b and Fig. 5.3c respectively. The reinforcement required may be calculated using the WSD
method or the ULSD method. The reinforcement thus calculated should be placed as indicated in Fig. 5.4.

5.2.2.4 Development (Embedment) Length

The development (embedment) length may be calculated from Eq. 5.12 for WSD or Eq. 5.15 for ULSD
methods.

Lecture Note Page 14

Shallow Foundations

A
Critical section varies
according to the type of
column as given in a,b and c

a B B

Column

concrete column
critical section

d
D
a)
ld
b
Avaliable embedment length

Masonary wall
critical section

d
b) D

x
x 2 ld
b

Steel column
Base plate
x
critical section
x
c) 2
d D

ld
b

Fig. 5.3 : Critical sections for moments and bond stress

Lecture Note Page 15

Shallow Foundations

C C

D d
Per cent of the total steel to be
placed in zone A
Zone A Zone B Zone A p2 = 1 -1 p
a-b a-b
2 b 2
Per cent of the total steel to be
a
placed in zone B

a) Reinforcement in the short direction p1 = ( a / b2 + 1 )

dD

Section D - D

longitudinal steel uniformly placed

b) Reinforcement in the long direction

Fig.5.4: Placement of reinforcment bars for rectangular

spread footings

Lecture Note Page 16

Shallow Foundations

5.3 Combined Footings

5.3.1 General

Combined footings are shallow foundations which support more than one columns. Depending upon the
loading condition, combined footings may be either rectangular or trapezoidal in shape (Fig. 5.5a,b). The
design principles are the same as for spread footings.

5.3.2 Proportioning of Footing

5.3.2.1 Proportioning of Footing using the Presumptive Allowable Soil Pressure

For the proportioning of the footing, one uses Eq. (5.1). For the case under consideration (Fig. 5.5c),
Eq.(5.1) would attain the following form.

P 6e
 as  (1  ) (5.27)
A a

where

 as = allowable soil pressure

P = P1  P2 = resultant force

A = a  b = area of footings

b = width of footing

a = length of footing

e = eccentricity of the resultant force P

The eccentricity is determined by taking moments of forces about the centre of the footing.

 Pe  P1e1  M 1  e 2 P2  M 2  0 (5.28)

M 1  M 2  e2 P2  P1e1
e (5.29)
P

After determining the dimensions a and b, one plots the contact pressure distribution (Fig.5.5c).

If no variation of pressure is desired, i.e., if it is intended to have a uniform pressure distribution, the footing
should be dimensioned in such a way that the centroid of the footing coincides with the line of action of the
resultant vertical force.

Lecture Note Page 17

Shallow Foundations

b
b1 2
b

a a

P1 P2 Variable P1 columns
Variable P2
columns

s s

D D

a
a

b) Trapezoidal footing
a) Rectangular footing

e1 e2
M1
P1 SP M2 P2
e
D

a/2 a/2

min
max

c) Contact pressure distribution

Fig. 5.5 : Combined footings

Lecture Note Page 18

Shallow Foundations

5.3.2.2 Proportioning of Footing using the Soil Strength Parameters  and c

For proportioning the footing using  and c, one should use the procedure outlined in 5.1.2. One should
note, however, that Eq. (5.6) does not apply for trapezoidal areas.

5.3.3 Structural Design

The footing is designed as reinforced concrete beam. One should determine the shear force and bending
moment diagrams along the length of the footing (Fig. 5.6a). With the help of the diagrams one determines
the necessary depth of the footing and the reinforcement required (5.1.3). The placement of reinforcing
bars should be done as indicated in Fig. 5.6b and c. The entire length of the footing in the long direction
may be considered as a beam and the reinforcing bars placed according to the moment requirement. In the
short direction, however, the entire footing is not effective in resisting bending. The zone closest to the
columns is utilized. One should therefore use an effective width which is the sum of column width plus the
effective depth for the placement of the bars (Fig. 5.6b,c).

5.4 Strap or Cantilever Footings

5.4.1 General

Strap footings are used as alternatives to combined footings when the cost of combined footings is relatively
high.

Essentially a strap footing consists of a rigid beam connecting two pads (footings) to transmit unbalanced
shear and moment from the statically unbalanced footing to the second footing.

5.4.2 Proportioning of the Footings

In the proportioning of the footings, two basic assumptions are used. These are

a. The allowable soil pressure underneath the footings is known and is assumed uniformly distributed
(Fig. 5.7).
b. The strap or beam connecting the two footings is perfectly rigid. This rigid beam is assumed to have
no vertical soil reaction (Fig. 5.7).

Lecture Note Page 19

Shallow Foundations

P1 P2
1 2

Contact pressure per

l1 l2 l2 l1 linear meter.

min
max

P1 P2

Shear force

M1
M2
Bending moment

a) Shear force and bending moment diagrams

Zone A = reinforcement as
required
a' a"
b' b" b
Zone B = minimum allowable
reinforcement

a' + d
a" + d
Zone B Zone A Zone B Zone A Zone B

columns
a' a" b'

d D

Zone B Zone A Zone B Zone A Zone B Reinforcement based on

moment diagram
b)Reinforcement in the short direction. c)Reinforcement in the long direction

Fig. 5.6 :Structural consideration of combined footing

Lecture Note Page 20

Shallow Foundations

column Footing column

b1 b' b" b2
a' a"
Strap
a2
a1

P1 P2
xc

Ws
xs
a' a''

a2
a1

a1 a2

a'/2 e xR
R1 R2

Fig. 5.7: Strap or cantilever footing

The procedures for proportioning the footings are indicated below [19]:

(i) Assume a1 and establish the eccentricity e of the soil reaction force R1 (Fig. 5.7)
e  xc  x R (5.30)

a
a1  2(  e) (5.31)
2

(ii) Determine the magnitude of the soil reaction force by taking moments about R 2
xc x
R1  P1  Ws s (5.32)
xR xR

where

P1 = load on column.

Ws = weight of the strap.

In Eq. (5.32) the weight of the strap, Ws , may be neglected if the strap is relatively short.

Lecture Note Page 21

Shallow Foundations

(iii) Determine the magnitude of R 2 from equilibrium consideration

R2  P1  P2  Ws  R1 (5.33)

(iv) Finally, compute the width of the footings

R1
b1  (5.34)
a1 a1

= (5.35)

It should be noted that the actual bearing pressures under the footings should not be very different from
each other in order to minimize differential settlement.

5.4.3 Structural Design

After the footings are properly proportioned, one calculates the shear forces and bending moments of the
system (Fig. 5.7). One then designs the footings and the strap using the same procedure as outlined in 5.3.3

=///=

Lecture Note Page 22