Scribd
Upload
193 views1 page

Foundation - Analysis - and - Design - (Bowles - 5ed) 244 PDF

This document discusses and compares the theories of Terzaghi, Hansen, and Meyerhof regarding bearing capacity equations for shallow foundations. It notes that Terzaghi and Hansen's equations neglect shear along the boundary of the foundation, while Meyerhof's approach considers footing-soil interaction. The document also provides details on Terzaghi's development of bearing capacity equations using plasticity theory and his assumptions regarding shear slip lines and stress trajectories beneath foundations.

Uploaded by

Razi Baig
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
193 views1 page

Foundation - Analysis - and - Design - (Bowles - 5ed) 244 PDF

This document discusses and compares the theories of Terzaghi, Hansen, and Meyerhof regarding bearing capacity equations for shallow foundations. It notes that Terzaghi and Hansen's equations neglect shear along the boundary of the foundation, while Meyerhof's approach considers footing-soil interaction. The document also provides details on Terzaghi's development of bearing capacity equations using plasticity theory and his assumptions regarding shear slip lines and stress trajectories beneath foundations.

Uploaded by

Razi Baig
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

Neglect

shear
(Terzaghi,
Hansen)
Rough

(a)

Meyerhof
Terzaghi and Hansen
For Hansen, Meyerhof:
spiral for

Terzaghi:

(b)

Figure 4-3 (a) Shallow foundation with rough base defined. Terzaghi and Hansen equations of Table 4-1 neglect
shear along cd\ (b) general footing-soil interaction for bearing-capacity equations for strip footingleft side for
Terzaghi (1943), Hansen (1970), and right side Meyerhof (1951).

oped by Prandtl (ca. 1920) from using the theory of plasticity to analyze the punching of
a rigid base into a softer (soil) material. Similar to Eq. (Jk), the basic equation was for the
case in which a unit width from a long strip produced a plane strain case, all shape factors
St = 1.00, but the Af; factors were computed differently. Terzaghi used a = <f> in Figs. 4-2
and 4-3 whereas most other theories use the a = 45 4- </>/2 shown. We see in Table 4-1 that
Terzaghi only used shape factors with the cohesion (sc) and base (sy) terms. The Terzaghi
bearing-capacity equation is developed, as was Eq. (), by summing vertical forces on the
wedge bac of Fig. 4-3. The difference in TV factors results from the assumption of the log
spiral arc ad and exit wedge cde of Fig 4-3. This makes a very substantial difference in how
Pp is computed, which in turn gives the different Ni values. The shear slip lines shown on
Fig. 4-3 qualitatively illustrate stress trajectories in the plastic zone beneath the footing as
the ultimate bearing pressure is developed.
Terzaghi's bearing-capacity equations were intended for "shallow" foundations where

You might also like