EFFECT OF WATER TABLE ON SAFE BEARING CAPACITY OF SOIL

The position of ground water has a significant effect on the bearing capacity of soil. Presence of
water table at a depth less than the width of the foundation from the foundation bottom will
reduce the bearing capacity of the soil.
The bearing capacity equation incorporating the ground water table correction factors is given
below.

Where = Ultimate bearing capacity of soil in
c = Cohesion of soil in
Nc, Nq, Ng are Therzaghis bearing capacity constants.
= depth of foundation in meters
B = Width of the foundation in meters
and are water table correction factors

The water table correction factors can be obtained from the equations given below.
1. When the water table is below the base of foundation at a distance b the correction is
given by the following equation
;
when b =0, = 0.5

2. When water table further rises above base of foundation, correction factor comes in to
action, which is given by the following equation.

when a = , = 0.5

Fig 1: Showing the influence of water table below foundation
The use of these equations is explained with the help of the Fig 1.
First let us begin with the correction factor
When water table is at a depth greater than or equals to the width of foundation, from the
foundation bottom, the correction factor is 1. i.e. there is no effect on the safe bearing
capacity.
Let us assume water table started rising then the effect of comes in to action. The
correction factor will be less than 1. When the water table reaches the bottom of foundation,
i.e, when b = 0, = 0.5.
Now let us assume water table further raises, above the depth of foundation. When the depth
of water table is just touching the bottom of foundation, a = 0. This means = 1.0. On
further rising, when the water table reaches the ground level, Rw1 becomes 0.5.
Hence, the assessment of ground water level is an important aspect in any site investigation.

Bearing capacity of shallow foundations
Bearing capacity

The ultimate bearing capacity of a foundation is calculated from an equation that
incorporates appropriate soil parameters (e.g. shear strength, unit weight) and
details about the size, shape and founding depth of the footing. Terzaghi (1943)
stated the ultimate bearing capacity of a strip footing as a three-term expression
incorporating the bearing capacity factors: N
c
, N
q
and N, which are related to the
angle of friction (|).
q
f
=c.N
c
+q
o
.N
q
+ .B .N
g

For drained loading, calculations are in terms of effective stresses; | is > 0 and N
c
,
N
q
and N are all > 0.
For undrained loading, calculations are in terms of total stresses; the undrained shear
strength (s
u
); N
q
= 1.0 and N = 0
c = apparent cohesion intercept
q
o
= .D (i.e. density x depth)
D = founding depth
B = breadth of foundation
= unit weight of the soil removed.

Bearing capacity equation (undrained)
Bearing capacity of shallow foundations
Skempton's equation is widely used for undrained clay
soils:
q
f
= s
u
.N
cu
+ q
o

where N
cu
= Skempton's bearing capacity factor, which can
be obtained from a chart or by using the following
expression:
N
cu
= N
c
.s
c
.d
c

where s
c
is a shape factor and d
c
is a depth factor.
N
q
= 1, N

= 0, N
c
= 5.14
s
c
= 1 + 0.2 (B/L) for B<=L
d
c
= 1+ (0.053 D/B ) for D/B < 4


Bearing capacity equation (drained)
Bearing capacity of shallow foundations
- Bearing capacity factors
- Shape factors
- Depth factors
Terzaghi (1943) stated the bearing capacity of a foundation as a three-term
expression incorporating the bearing capacity factors
N
c
, N
q
and N

.
He proposed the following equation for the ultimate bearing capacity of a long strip
footing:
q
f
=c.N
c
+q
o
.N
q
+ .B .N

This equation is applicable only for shallow footings carrying vertical non-eccentric
loading.
For rectangular and circular foundations, shape factors are introduced.
q
f
= c .N
c
.s
c
+ q
o
.N
q
.s
q
+ .B .N

.s
g

Other factors can be used to accommodate depth, inclination of loading, eccentricity
of loading, inclination of base and ground. Depth is only significant if it exceeds the
breadth.


Bearing capacity factors
Bearing capacity equation (drained)
The bearing capacity factors relate to the drained angle of friction (|'). The c.N
c
term
is the contribution from soil shear strength, the q
o
.N
q
term is the contribution from
the surcharge pressure above the founding level, the .B..N
g
term is the
contribution from the self weight of the soil. Terzaghi's analysis was based on an
active wedge with angles |' rather than (45+|'/2), and his bearing capacity factors
are in error, particularly for low values of |'. Commonly used values for N
q
and N
c
are
derived from the Prandtl-Reissner expression giving

Exact values for N
g
are not directly obtainable; values have been proposed by Brinch
Hansen (1968), which are widely used in Europe, and also by Meyerhof (1963), which
have been adopted in North America.
Brinch Hansen:
N

= 1.8 (N
q
- 1) tan|'
Meyerhof:
N

= (N
q
- 1) tan(1.4 |')

Shape factors
Bearing capacity equation (drained)
Terzaghi presented modified versions of his bearing capacity equation for shapes of
foundation other than a long strip, and these have since been expressed as shape
factors. Brinch Hansen and Vesic (1963) have suggested shape factors which depend
on |'. However, modified versions of the Terzaghi factors are usually considered
sufficiently accurate for most purposes.
s
c
s
q
s

square 1.3 1.2 0.8
circle 1.3 1.2 0.6
rectangle (B<L) 1+ 0.2(B/L) 1+ 0.2(B/L) 1 - 0.4(B/L)
B = breadth, L = length



Depth factors
Bearing capacity equation (drained)
It is usual to assume an increase in bearing capacity when the depth (D) of a
foundation is greater than the breadth (B). The general bearing capacity equation
can be modified by the inclusion of depth factors.
q
f
= c.N
c
.d
c
+ q
o
.N
q
.d
q
+ B.N

.d

for D>B:
d
c
= 1 + 0.4 arctan(D/B)
d
q
= 1 + 2 tan(|'(1-sin|') arctan(B/D)
d

= 1.0
for D=<B:
d
c
= 1 + 0.4(D/B)
d
q
= 1 + 2 tan(|'(1-sin|') (B/D)
d

= 1.0

Factor of safety
Bearing capacity of shallow foundations
A factor of safety F
s
is used to calculate the allowable bearing capacity q
a
from the
ultimate bearing pressure q
f
. The value of F
s
is usually taken to be 2.5 - 3.0.

The factor of safety should be applied only to the increase in stress, i.e. the net
bearing pressure q
n
. Calculating q
a
from q
f
only satisfies the criterion of safety against
shear failure. However, a value for F
s
of 2.5 - 3.0 is sufficiently high to empirically
limit settlement. It is for this reason that the factors of safety used in foundation
design are higher than in other areas of geotechnical design. (For slopes, the factor
of safety would typically be 1.3 - 1.4).
Experience has shown that the settlement of a typical foundation on soft clay is likely
to be acceptable if a factor of 2.5 is used. Settlements on stiff clay may be quite large
even though ultimate bearing capacity is relatively high, and so it may be appropriate
to use a factor nearer 3.0.





Presumed bearing values
Bearing capacity
For preliminary design purposes, BS 8004 gives presumed bearing values which are
the pressures which would normally result in an adequate factor of safety against
shear failure for particular soil types, but without consideration of settlement.
Category Types of rocks and soils Presumed bearing value
Non-cohesive soils Dense gravel or dense sand and gravel >600 kN/m

Medium dense gravel,
or medium dense sand and gravel
<200 to 600 kN/m
Loose gravel, or loose sand and gravel <200 kN/m
Compact sand >300 kN/m
Medium dense sand 100 to 300 kN/m
Loose sand
<100 kN/m depends on
degree of looseness
Cohesive soils Very stiff bolder clays & hard clays 300 to 600 kN/m
Stiff clays 150 to 300 kN/m
Firm clay 75 to 150 kN/m
Soft clays and silts < 75 kN/m
Very soft clay Not applicable
Peat Not applicable
Made ground Not applicable
Presumed bearing values for Keuper Marl
Weathering Zone Description
Presumed bearing
value
Fully weathered IVb Matrix only as cohesive soil
Partially
weathered
IVa Matrix with occasional pellets less than 3mm 125 to 250 kN/m
III Matrix with lithorelitics up to 25mm 250 to 500 kN/m
II
Angular blocks of unweathered marl with virtually no
matrix
500 to 750 kN/m
Unweathered 1 Mudstone (often not fissured) 750 to 1000 kN/m

Bearing capacity of piles
Bearing capacity
- Driven piles in non-cohesive soil
- Bored piles in non-cohesive soil
- Driven piles in cohesive soil
- Bored piles in cohesive soil
- Carrying capacity of piles in a layered soil
- Effects of ground water
The ultimate bearing capacity of a pile used in design
may be one three values:
the maximum load Q
max
, at which further penetration
occurs without the load increasing;
a calculated value Q
f
given by the sum of the end-
bearing and shaft resistances;
or the load at which a settlement of 0.1
diameter occurs (when Q
max
is not clear).
For large-diameter piles, settlement can be large,
therefore a safety factor of 2-2.5 is usually used on the
working load.
A pile loaded axially will carry the load:
partly by shear stresses (t
s
) generated along the
shaft of the pile and
partly by normal stresses (q
b
) generated at the base.
The ultimate capacity Q
f
of a pile is equal to the base capacity Q
b
plus the shaft
capacity Q
s
.
Q
f
= Q
b
+ Q
s
= A
b
. q
b
+ E(A
s
. t
s
)
where A
b
is the area of the base and A
s
is the surface area of the shaft within a soil
layer.

Full shaft capacity is mobilised at much smaller displacements than those related to
full base resistance. This is important when determining the settlement response of a
pile. The same overall bearing capacity may be achieved with a variety of
combinations of pile diameter and length. However, a long slender pile may be shown
to be more efficient than a short stubby pile. Longer piles generate a larger proportion
of their full capacity by skin friction and so their full capacity can be mobilised at
much lower settlements.
The proportions of capacity contributed by skin friction and end bearing do not just
depend on the geometry of the pile. The type of construction and the sequence of soil
layers are important factors.





Driven piles in non-cohesive soil
Bearing capacity of piles
- Ultimate pile capacity
- Standard penetration test
- Cone penetration test
Driving a pile has different effects on the soil surrounding it depending on the
relative density of the soil. In loose soils, the soil is compacted, forming a depression
in the ground around the pile. In dense soils, any further compaction is small, and
the soil is displaced upward causing ground heave. In loose soils, driving is preferable
to boring since compaction increases the end-bearing capacity.
In non-cohesive soils, skin friction is low because a low friction 'shell' forms around
the pile. Tapered piles overcome this problem since the soil is recompacted on each
blow and this gap cannot develop.
Pile capacity can be calculated using soil properties obtained from standard
penetration tests or cone penetration tests. The ultimate load must then be divided
by a factor of safety to obtain a working load. This factor of safety depends on the
maximum tolerable settlement, which in turn depends on both the pile diameter and
soil compressibility. For example, a safety factor of 2.5 will usually ensure a pile of
diameter less than 600mm in a non-cohesive soil will not settle by more than 15mm.
Although the method of installing a pile has a significant effect on failure load, there
are no reliable calculation methods available for quantifying any effect. Judgement is
therefore left to the experience of the engineer.





Ultimate pile capacity
Driven piles in non-cohesive soil
The ultimate carrying capacity of a pile is:
Q
f
= Q
b
+ Q
s

The base resistance, Q
b
can be found from Terzaghi's equation for bearing capacity,
q
f
= 1.3 c N
c
+ q
o
N
q
+ 0.4 B N

The 0.4 B N

term may be ignored, since the diameter is considerably less

than the depth of the pile.
The 1.3 c N
c
term is zero, since the soil is non-cohesive.
The net unit base resistance is therefore
q
nf
= q
f
- q
o
= q
o
(N
q
-1)
and the net total base resistance is
Q
b
= q
o
(N
q
-1) A
b

The ultimate unit skin friction (shaft) resistance can be found from
q
s
= K
s
.o'
v
.tano
where o'
v
= average vertical effective stress in a given layer
o = angle of wall friction, based on pile material and |
K
s
= earth pressure coefficient
Therefore, the total skin friction resistance is given by the sum of the layer
resistances:
Q
s
= E(Ks .o'
v
.tano .A
s
)
The self-weight of the pile may be ignored, since the weight of the concrete is almost
equal to the weight of the soil displaced.
Therefore, the ultimate pile capacity is:
Q
f
= A
b
q
o
N
q
+ E(Ks .o'
v
.tano .A
s
)

Values of K
s
and o can be related to the angle of internal friction (|) using the
following table according to Broms.
Material o
K
s

low density high density
steel 20 0.5

1.0
concrete 3/4 | 1.0 2.0
timber 2/3 | 1.5 4.0
It must be noted that, like much of pile design, this is an empirical relationship. Also,
from empirical methods it is clear that Q
s
and Q
b
both reach peak values somewhere at
a depth between 10 and 20 diameters.
It is usually assumed that skin friction never exceeds 110 kN/m and base resistance
will not exceed 11000 kN/m.





Standard penetration test
Driven piles in non-cohesive soil
The standard penetration test is a simple in-situ test in
which the N-value is the mumber of blows taken to
drive a 50mm diameter bar 300mm into the base of a
bore hole.
Schmertmann (1975) has correlated N-values obtained
from SPT tests against effective overburden stress as
shown in the figure.
The effective overburden stress = the weight of
material above the base of the borehole - the wight of water
e.g. depth of soil = 5m, depth of water = 4m, unit weight of soil = 20kN/m, o'
v
= 5m
x 20kN/m - 4m x 9.81kN/m ~ 60 kN/m
Once a value for | has been estimated, bearing capacity factors can be determined
and used in the usual way.
Meyerhof (1976) produced correlations between base and frictional resistances and N-
values. It is recommended that N-values first be normalised with respect to effective
overburden stress:
Normalised N = N
measured
x 0.77 log(1920/o
v
)
Pile type Soil type
Ultimate base resistance
q
b
(kPa)
Ultimate shaft resistance
q
s
(kPa)
Driven
Gravelly sand
Sand
40(L/d) N
but < 400 N
2 N
avg


Sandy silt
Silt
20(L/d) N
but < 300 N

Bored Gravel and sands
13(L/d) N
but < 300 N


N
avg


Sandy silt 13(L/d) N

Silt but < 300 N
L = embedded length
d = shaft diameter
N
avg
= average value along shaft



Cone penetration test
Driven piles in non-cohesive soil
End-bearing resistance
The end-bearing capacity of the pile is assumed to be equal to the unit cone
resistance (q
c
). However, due to normally occurring variations in measured cone
resistance, Van der Veen's averaging method is used:
q
b
= average cone resistance calculated over a depth equal to three pile diameters
above to one pile diameter below the base level of the pile.
Shaft resistance
The skin friction can also be calculated from the cone penetration test from values of
local side friction or from the cone resistance value using an empirical relationship:
At a given depth, q
s
= S
p
. q
c

where S
p
= a coefficient dependent on the type of pile


Type of pile S
p

Solid timber )
Pre-cast concrete )
Solid steel driven )

0.005 - 0.012
Open-ended steel 0.003 - 0.008

Bored piles in non-cohesive soil
Bearing capacity of piles
The design process for bored piles in granular soils is essentially the same as that for
driven piles. It must be assumed that boring loosens the soil and therefore, however
dense the soil, the value of the angle of friction used for calculating N
q
values for end
bearing and o values for skin friction must be those assumed for loose soil. However,
if rotary drilling is carried out under a bentonite slurry |' can be taken as that for the
undisturbed soil.





Driven piles in cohesive soil
Bearing capacity of piles
Driving piles into clays alters the physical characteristics of the soil. In soft clays,
driving piles results in an increase in pore water pressure, causing a reduction in
effective stress;.a degree of ground heave also occurs. As the pore water pressure
dissipates with time and the ground subsides, the effective stress in the soil will
increase. The increase in o'
v
leads to an increase in the bearing capacity of the pile
with time. In most cases, 75% of the ultimate bearing capacity is achieved within 30
days of driving.
For piles driven into stiff clays, a little consolidation takes place, the soil cracks and is
heaved up. Lateral vibration of the shaft from each blow of the hammer forms an
enlarged hole, which can then fill with groundwater or extruded porewater. This, and
'strain softening', which occurs due to the large strains in the clay as the pile is
advanced, lead to a considerable reduction in skin friction compared with the
undisturbed shear strength (s
u
) of the clay. To account for this in design calculations
an adhesion factor, o, is introduced. Values of o can be found from empirical data
previously recorded. A maximum value (for stiff clays) of 0.45 is recommended.
The ultimate bearing capacity Q
f
of a driven pile in cohesive soil can be calculated
from:
Q
f
= Q
b
+ Q
s

where the skin friction term is a summation of layer resistances
Q
s
= E( o .s
u
(avg) .A
s
)
and the end bearing term is
Q
b
= s
u
.N
c
.A
b

N
c
= 9.0 for clays and silty clays.





Bored piles in cohesive soil
Bearing capacity of piles
Following research into bored cast-in-place piles in London clay, calculation of the
ultimate bearing capacity for bored piles can be done the same way as for driven
piles. The adhesion factor should be taken as 0.45. It is thought that only half the
undisturbed shear strength is mobilised by the pile due to the combined effect of
swelling, and hence softening, of the clay in the walls of the borehole. Softening
results from seepage of water from fissures in the clay and from the un-set concrete,
and also from 'work softening' during the boring operation.
The mobilisation of full end-bearing capacity by large-diameter piles requires much
larger displacements than are required to mobilise full skin-friction, and therefore
safety factors of 2.5 to 3.0 may be required to avoid excessive settlement at working
load.




Carrying capacity of piles in layered soil
Bearing capacity of piles
When a pile extends through a number of different layers of soil with different
properties, these have to be taken into account when calculating the ultimate
carrying capacity of the pile. The skin friction capacity is calculated by simply
summing the amounts of resistance each layer exerts on the pile. The end bearing
capacity is calculated just in the layer where the pile toe terminates. If the pile toe
terminates in a layer of dense sand or stiff clay overlying a layer of soft clay or loose
sand there is a danger of it punching through to the weaker layer. To account for
this, Meyerhof's equation is used.
The base resistance at the pile toe is
q
p
= q
2
+ (q
1
-q
2
)H / 10B but q
1

where B is the diameter of the pile, H is the thickness between the base of the pile and
the top of the weaker layer, q
2
is the ultimate base resistance in the weak layer, q
1
is
the ultimate base resistance in the strong layer.






Effects of groundwater
Bearing capacity of piles
The presence and movement of groundwater affects the carrying capacity of piles,
the processes of construction and sometimes the durability of piles in service.
Effect on bearing capacity
In cohesive soils, the permeability is so low that any movement of water is very slow.
They do not suffer any reduction in bearing capacity in the presence of groundwater.
In granular soils, the position of the water table is important. Effective stresses in
saturated sands can be as much as 50% lower than in dry sand; this affects both the
end-bearing and skin-friction capacity of the pile.
Effects on construction
When a concrete cast-in-place pile is being installed and the bottom of the borehole is
below the water table, and there is water in the borehole, a 'tremie' is used.
With its lower end lowered to the bottom of the borehole,
the tremmie is filled with concrete and then slowly raised,
allowing concrete to flow from the bottom. As the tremie is
raised during the concreting it must be kept below the
surface of the concrete in the pile. Before the tremie is
withdrawn completely sufficient concrete should be placed
to displace all the free water and watery cement. If a tremie
is not used and more than a few centimetres of water lie in
the bottom of the borehole, separation of the concrete can
take place within the pile, leading to a significant reduction
in capacity.
A problem can also arise when boring takes place through clays. Site investigations
may show that a pile should terminate in a layer of clay. However, due to natural
variations in bed levels, there is a risk of boring extending into underlying strata.
Unlike the clay, the underlying beds may be permeable and will probably be under a
considerable head of water. The 'tapping' of such aquifers can be the cause of
difficulties during construction.
Effects on piles in service
The presence of groundwater may lead to corrosion or deterioration of the pile's
fabric.
In the case of steel piles, a mixture of water and air in the soil provides conditions in
which oxidation corrosion of steel can occur; the presence of normally occurring salts
in groundwater may accelerate the process.
In the case of concrete piles, the presence of salts such as sulphates or chlorides can
result in corrosion of reinforcement, with possible consequential bursting of the
concrete. Therefore, adequate cover must be provided to the reinforcement, or the
reinforcement itself must be protected in some way. Sulphate attack on the cement
compounds in concrete may lead to the expansion and subsequent cracking. Corrosion
problems are minimised if the concrete has a high cement/aggregate ratio and is well
compacted during placement.