Finite Element Analysis of Elastic Settlement y

of Spreadfootings Founded in Soil

JaeH.Chung,Ph.D.
B id S ft I tit t BridgeSoftwareInstitute
UniversityofFlorida,Gainesville,FL,USA
UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA
E n g i n e e r i n g
C i v i l & C o a s t a l
Content Content
1. Background
2. FBMultiPierFEAmodeldevelopment
3. TheoreticalbasisofFBMultiPierFEAmodel
3.1Computationofsoilresistance(Newmarks solutionofBoussinesqs equation)
3.2Constitutiverelationship
3.3Homogenezation ofheterogeity
3.4Soilstiffness
3.5Averagingmethods
UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA
E n g i n e e r i n g
C i v i l & C o a s t a l
Strengthvs.Serviceability(1/3) Strengthvs.Serviceability(1/3)
Foundationsshouldbeproportionedtowithstandall
anticipatedloadssafelyincludingthepermanentloadsofthe
str ct re and transient loads structureandtransientloads.
Mostdesigncodesspecifythetypesofloadsandload
combinationstobeconsideredinfoundationdesign,e.g., g , g ,
AASHTO.
Theseloadcombinationscanbeusedtoidentifythelimit
t t f th f d ti t b i id d A li it t t statesforthefoundationtypesbeingconsidered.Alimitstate
isreachedwhenthestructurenolongerfulfillsitsperformance
requirements.
UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA
E n g i n e e r i n g
C i v i l & C o a s t a l
Strengthvs.Serviceability(2/3) Strengthvs.Serviceability(2/3)
Anultimatelimitstate(ULS)correspondstothemaximum
loadcarryingcapacity(eitherstructuralorgeotechnical
fail re) of the fo ndation The ltimate state is also called the failure)ofthefoundation.Theultimatestateisalsocalledthe
strengthlimitstate.
bearingcapacityofsoilexceeded,
excessivelossofcontact,i.e.,eccentricity,
slidingatthebaseoffooting,
lossofoverallstability,i.e.,,globalstability,or
exceedanceofstructuralcapacity 1997UBCorACI318
Aserviceabilitylimitstate(SLS)correspondstolossof
serviceability, and occurs before collapse. serviceability,andoccursbeforecollapse.
excessivedifferentialortotalfoundationsettlements,
excessivelateraldisplacements,or
structural deterioration of the foundation
UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA
E n g i n e e r i n g
C i v i l & C o a s t a l
structuraldeteriorationofthefoundation.
Strengthvs.Serviceability(3/3) Strengthvs.Serviceability(3/3)
Allrelevantlimitstatesmustbeconsideredinfoundation
designtoensureanadequatedegreeofsafetyand
ser iceabilit All fo ndation design in practice is geared serviceability.Allfoundationdesigninpracticeisgeared
towardsaddressingtheULSandtheSLS.
Existingdesignmethodologyincludes: g g gy
theAllowableStressDesign(ASD)
theUltimateStrengthDesign(USD)
theLoadandResistanceFactorDesign(LRFD) t e oad a d es sta ce acto es g ( )
FocusismadeonASDforgeotechnicaldesign.
UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA
E n g i n e e r i n g
C i v i l & C o a s t a l
Designconceptandprocedure(1/4)
Thegeotechnicaldesignofaspreadfootingisatwopart
process.
1 E i h ll bl il b i i bili f h 1. Estimatetheallowablesoilbearingcapacitytoensurestabilityofthe
foundationanddetermineiftheproposedstructuralloadscanbe
supportedonareasonablysizedfoundation.
2 P di f l d h l l l d d 2. Predictanamountofsettlementduetotheactualstructuralloadsand
thetimeofoccurrenceestimated.Experiencehasshownthat
settlementisusuallythecontrollingfactorindesign.
Thi i t i i i t t l id ti ll li it t l bl Thisisnotsurprisingsincestructuralconsiderationsusuallylimittolerable
settlementstovaluesthatcanbeachievedonlyoncompetentsoilsnot
pronetoabearingcapacityfailure.
UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA
E n g i n e e r i n g
C i v i l & C o a s t a l
Geotechnicaldesignconceptandprocedure(1/2)
Theallowablebearingcapacityofaspreadfootingisthelesserof
Theappliedstressthatresultsinashearfailuredividedbyasuitablefactorof
safety(FS);thisisacriterionbasedonULS;or
Th li d t th t lt i ifi d t f ttl t thi i Theappliedstressthatresultsinaspecifiedamountofsettlement;thisisa
criterionbasedonSLS.
FactorofSafety(FS)=MeanvalueofResistance(MaterialStrength)/DesignLoad
(the maximum load the footing should ever withstand in service); a typical value of (themaximumloadthefootingshouldeverwithstandinservice);atypicalvalueof
FSrangesfrom2.5to3
Theconceptofdecreasingallowablebearingcapacitywithincreasingfootingwidth
forthesettlementcontrolledcasesisanimportantconcepttounderstand.
Asthefootingwidthincreases,thestressincreasefeltbythesoilmaydecrease
buttheeffectoftheappliedstresswillextendmoredeeplybelowthefootingbase.
Settlementsmayincreaseasthewidthincreasesdependingonthetypeofsoils
within the influence depth withintheinfluencedepth.
UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA
E n g i n e e r i n g
C i v i l & C o a s t a l
Geotechnicaldesignconceptandprocedure(2/2)
Insuchcases,theonlywaytolimitthesettlementstoacertaindesiredvalueisby
reducingtheappliedstress;theallowablebearingcapacityisthevalueofthe
appliedstressatthefootingbasethatwillresultinagivensettlement.
The more stringent the settlement criterion the less the stress that can be applied Themorestringentthesettlementcriterionthelessthestressthatcanbeapplied
tothefootingwhichinturnmeansthattheallowablebearingcapacityis
correspondinglyreduced.Inallowablebearingcapacityestimation,atotalsafety
factorof2.5~3.0ismostlyused.
UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA
E n g i n e e r i n g
C i v i l & C o a s t a l
Allowablebearingcapacity(shearfailurevs.settlement)
(source:GeotechnicalEngineering:ShallowFoundationsbyZhou,Y.,FHWANHI06089
Structuraldesignconceptandprocedure
Foundationdesignprocedurestypicallyprovidesoilbearing
pressuresonanallowablestressdesign(ASD)basiswhile
seismic forces in the 1997 UBC and in most concrete design seismicforcesinthe1997UBC,andinmostconcretedesign
underACI318,areonanultimatestrengthdesign(USD)basis.
ThedesignermakesatransitionfromtheASDprocedureto g p
determineasizeofthefootingtotheUSDproceduresto
designthefooting.
UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA
E n g i n e e r i n g
C i v i l & C o a s t a l
Exampleofacombinedfooting Exampleofacombinedfooting
They are used primarily when the column spacing is nonuniform (Bowles, 1996) or
when isolated spreadfootings become so closely spaced that a combination footing is
simpler to form and construct.
UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA
E n g i n e e r i n g
C i v i l & C o a s t a l
Spillthrough
Theoryvs.Reality(1/2) Theoryvs.Reality(1/2)
Therearevarioustheoriestopredict(1)shearfailureand(2)loaddeformation
behaviorofsoil. Why:semiempiricalnatureanduncertainty
Generalshearfailure
Elasticsettlementanalysismethods:
Variationoffrictionalshearstrengthfactor
Localshearfailure
UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA
E n g i n e e r i n g
C i v i l & C o a s t a l
y
Newmark,Griffiths,Janbu etal.,Mayne andPoulos
Schmertmann,Meyerhof,Burland andBurbidge
Theoryvs.Reality(2/2) Theoryvs.Reality(2/2)
A h i i h d il bl l l h l i A h i i h d il bl l l h l i Atthepresenttime,variousmethodsareavailabletocalculatetheelastic Atthepresenttime,variousmethodsareavailabletocalculatetheelastic
settlement.Theyare,ingeneral,intwocategories; settlement.Theyare,ingeneral,intwocategories;
(1) (1) methodsbasedonobservedsettlementofprototypesthatarecorrelated methodsbasedonobservedsettlementofprototypesthatarecorrelated
with in situ tests such as the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) the Cone with in situ tests such as the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) the Cone withinsitutestssuchastheStandardPenetrationTest(SPT),theCone withinsitutestssuchastheStandardPenetrationTest(SPT),theCone
PenetrationTest(CPT), PenetrationTest(CPT),Pressuremeter Pressuremeter Test(PMT),andtheflatdilatometer Test(PMT),andtheflatdilatometer
test;and test;and
Schemertmanns Schemertmanns influence line method influence line method Schemertmann s Schemertmann s influencelinemethod influencelinemethod
(2)methodsbasedonthetheoryofelasticitysuchastheStressInfluence (2)methodsbasedonthetheoryofelasticitysuchastheStressInfluence
Method( Method(Newmarks Newmarks solutionof solutionofBoussinesq Boussinesq Eqn.)andtheStrain Eqn.)andtheStrain
(displacement)InfluenceMethod (displacement)InfluenceMethod ( p ) ( p )
Despitealltheextensivelibraryofmethods,uncertaintiesalwaysexistin Despitealltheextensivelibraryofmethods,uncertaintiesalwaysexistin
predictingsettlementsoftheshallowfoundationinsoilduetohighlyerratic predictingsettlementsoftheshallowfoundationinsoilduetohighlyerratic
densityandcompressibilityvariation. densityandcompressibilityvariation.Ifsoilwereelastic,homogeneous,and Ifsoilwereelastic,homogeneous,and
isotropic,therewouldbenodifficultyinthesettlementpredictionusingthe isotropic,therewouldbenodifficultyinthesettlementpredictionusingthe
theoryofelasticity.Inreality,notonlyareactualsoilsnonhomogeneous(e.g., theoryofelasticity.Inreality,notonlyareactualsoilsnonhomogeneous(e.g.,
strataformation)andanisotropic(e.g.,theelasticmodulusvaryingwithdepth), strataformation)andanisotropic(e.g.,theelasticmodulusvaryingwithdepth),
b t l th i th diffi lt f l ti th i it t b t l th i th diffi lt f l ti th i it t t i ti t i ti
UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA
E n g i n e e r i n g
C i v i l & C o a s t a l
butalsothereisthedifficultyofevaluatingtheinsitustress butalsothereisthedifficultyofevaluatingtheinsitustressstrainproperties. strainproperties.
Reliability Reliabilitybasedmethodisonthehorizon basedmethodisonthehorizon..
Necessityofanumericalanalysistool Necessityofanumericalanalysistool
Forpracticalapplicationindesignpractice,areliablestandardized
procedurehastobeacombinationofthesetwomethods.
The theory of elasticity : the basis for establishing approximate methods for Thetheoryofelasticity:thebasisforestablishingapproximatemethodsfor
predictingsettlementsforpracticaldesignwhereacomputationally
efficientnumericalproceduretoestimaterepresentativesoilproperties
basedoninsitutestsanswerstotheallimportantquestionofselectinga p q g
soilstiffness(modulus)foruseintheseapproximatedresults.
Goal:simulatethesoilstructureinteractioninthefieldconditionswherea
proposedmodelwouldallowtheengineertoeasilycalibrateandmodify p p g y y
themodelingparametersbycapturingthesoilnonlinearitywithina
reasonablemarginofconservativeerrors.
UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA
E n g i n e e r i n g
C i v i l & C o a s t a l
Winklermodel
Overviewofmodelcomponents Eulerbeamtheory
UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA
E n g i n e e r i n g
C i v i l & C o a s t a l
Schematicdiagramofprimarymodelcomponents ApplicationofEulerBeamTheory
LinearFiniteElementAnalysis LinearFiniteElementAnalysisofWinklerproblem ofWinklerproblem
Discreteelementapproach
UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA
E n g i n e e r i n g
C i v i l & C o a s t a l
Conceptofdiscretization
Coefficientof Coefficientofsubgrade subgrade reaction reaction
If a flexible foundation is to be analyzed, then it is recommended that Subgrade
Modulus, i.e., the coefficient of subgrade reaction, be selected in consideration of
geometry (B or L) and embedment depth (Terzaghi 1955 and Vesic 1961,
ti l ) Thi i b th l f b d d l i t t t f respectively). This is because the value of subgrade modulus is not constant for a
given soil but depends on length, width, and embedment depth of the foundation
under consideration.
UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA
E n g i n e e r i n g
C i v i l & C o a s t a l
FEAmodelof FEAmodelofacombinedfooting acombinedfooting
A combined footing that supports a threecolumn faade is subjected to service loads.
Dimensions of the column is 1 m x 1m. The bearing soil is a 10m thick mediumdense
sand. Compute an immediate settlement due to service loads only.
LinearFEAmodelofWinklerproblem
UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA
E n g i n e e r i n g
C i v i l & C o a s t a l
Aschematicsketchofacombinedfooting
FB FBMultiPierNonlinearFiniteElementAnalysis MultiPierNonlinearFiniteElementAnalysis
Shallowfoundationsystemismodeledusingfiniteshellelements
andsoilsprings.
AschematicsketchofFEAmodelofspreadfooting
Springstiffness
UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA
E n g i n e e r i n g
C i v i l & C o a s t a l
FB FBMultiPierNonlinearFEAvs.linear(Winkler)FEA MultiPierNonlinearFEAvs.linear(Winkler)FEA
Soilnonlinearbehaviorsignificantlyaffectstheloaddisplacementbehaviorof
thestripfooting.Qu isabout38150kN forafrictionangleof30deg.
UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA
E n g i n e e r i n g
C i v i l & C o a s t a l
Variationofelasticsettlementprediction
FB FBMultiPierNonlinearFEAvs.LinearFEA MultiPierNonlinearFEAvs.LinearFEA
Whatifafactorofsafetyof3isusedindesign,i.e.,amaximumserviceloadis
limitedtoQu/3=12716kN. Thatsaboutatotalappliedload.Butsettlement
isstilltooexcessive(linearanalysispredictsabout12insettlementwhereas
l d l / f ) d bl nonlinearFEApredicts18in.settlementat1/3ofQu)andnotacceptable.
UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA
E n g i n e e r i n g
C i v i l & C o a s t a l
Conceptofsafetyfactor
FB FBMultiPierNonlinearFEAvs.linearFEA MultiPierNonlinearFEAvs.linearFEA
Evenwithafactorofsafetyof3,thepredictedsettlementistooexcessive.
Ifthesettlementislimitedto2in.,anallowableloadis2086kN (459kips).
Recall a total applied load of 13500 kN (3000 kips) Recallatotalappliedloadof13500kN (3000kips).
UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA
E n g i n e e r i n g
C i v i l & C o a s t a l
Applicationofserviceabilitylimit
Interpretationofthenumericalresults Interpretationofthenumericalresults
Limitationoflinearelasticanalysis
Stiffnessofsoilisconstantandindependentofappliedloads
Thefootingbehavesalmostlikearigidbody(relativelyspeaking)
Deflectionofthefootingispredictedtobe0.33m(13in.)
Thecurrentfootingdesign(size)isinadequateforserviceability
Consideringanexcessivedeformation,reliabilityoftheresultsisinquestion
Soilcouldbeinnearfailurestages;whatwouldbetheultimatebearingcapacity
ofthefooting?
Membranestiffnessoffootingmaybeacontributingfactortoflexureand,thus,
deflection.
l l l l FBMultiPiersolutioncapturesnonlinearsoilstructure
interactionphenomena.
UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA
E n g i n e e r i n g
C i v i l & C o a s t a l
Parametricstudy Parametricstudy(weak (weaksoil) soil)
Loosesandwithk=1000kN/m^3and
Internalfrictionangle=30deg.
UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA
E n g i n e e r i n g
C i v i l & C o a s t a l
Deformationofastripfootingfoundedonsoftsoil
Parametricstudy(stiffsoil) Parametricstudy(stiffsoil)
Densesandwithk=12000kN/m^3and
Internalfrictionangle=38deg.
UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA
E n g i n e e r i n g
C i v i l & C o a s t a l
Deformationofastripfootingfoundedonstiffsoil
Parametricstudy(stiffsoil) Parametricstudy(stiffsoil)
FB FBMultiPiernonlinearFEAresults MultiPiernonlinearFEAresults
UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA
E n g i n e e r i n g
C i v i l & C o a s t a l
2.FB 2.FBMultiPierFEAmodeldevelopment MultiPierFEAmodeldevelopment
FBMultiPier isa3DnonlinearFEAsoftwareprogramforuseinbridgepierapplication.
Withaprovenrecordofthevalidity,FBMultiPieriswidelyusedinanalysisofbridge
subfoundationsbothinU.S.andworldwide.AstepbystepprocedureofFBMultiPier
shallow foundation model development is provided in the following. shallowfoundationmodeldevelopmentisprovidedinthefollowing.
S df ti
UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA
E n g i n e e r i n g
C i v i l & C o a s t a l
Spreadfooting
(fromFHWANHI06089,Dec./2006)
ExampleofFB ExampleofFBMultiPierFEAmodeldevelopment MultiPierFEAmodeldevelopment
A single, rigid square foundation (118 in X 118 in) is to be
constructed to support a column load. Assume that the
s pporting soil is a medi m dense sand hose angle of internal supporting soil is a medium dense sand whose angle of internal
friction, total unit weight, and subgrade modulus are equal to
32 degrees,109 pcf, and 150 pci, respectively.
UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA
E n g i n e e r i n g
C i v i l & C o a s t a l
Step1:Selectaproblemtype Step1:Selectaproblemtype
UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA
E n g i n e e r i n g
C i v i l & C o a s t a l
Step2:Selectglobalparameters Step2:Selectglobalparameters
Go to Analysis page and specify a maximum number of iteration and the tolerance
for a degree of accuracy of numerical solution. User must be familiar with the
numerical solution procedure of FBMultiPier in nonlinear analysis and choose an
appropriate tolerance for problem of interest.
UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA
E n g i n e e r i n g
C i v i l & C o a s t a l
Step3:Discretizationoffooting Step3:Discretizationoffooting
Change a pilecap grid spacing in Pile Edit and locate a pile at the center of the pile
cap. NOTE: At least one pile must be assigned. In Step 8, it will be explained how to
make the axial resistance of this pseudo pile negligible and thus, its contribution to
the bearing capacity of the foundation can be minimal.
UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA
E n g i n e e r i n g
C i v i l & C o a s t a l
Step3:Discretizationoffooting Step3:Discretizationoffooting
Change a pilecap grid spacing in Pile Edit and locate a pile at the center of the pile
cap. NOTE: At least one pile must be assigned. In Step 8, it will be explained how to
make the axial resistance of this pseudo pile negligible and thus, its contribution to
the bearing capacity of the foundation can be minimal.
Gridspacingtable
Meshgeneration
UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA
E n g i n e e r i n g
C i v i l & C o a s t a l
Step4:Specifyafootingelevation Step4:Specifyafootingelevation
Change the cap (footing) elevation accordingly to the ground surface. NOTE: The pile
cap is modeled using finite thin shell elements. The centerline elevation of the cap
(the shell elements) must be properly located to include the half of the cap
thickness. The length of a pseudo pile have to be at least equal to the pile cap
thickness: by default, the program expects to have at least one pile embedded in the
soil.
Footingelevation
Footingdimensions
UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA
E n g i n e e r i n g
C i v i l & C o a s t a l
g
Step5:ChooseBearingResistanceoption
S 6 S if i l i f f i Step6:Specifymaterialpropertiesoffooting
UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA
E n g i n e e r i n g
C i v i l & C o a s t a l
BearingResistanceoption BearingResistanceoption
UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA
E n g i n e e r i n g
C i v i l & C o a s t a l
Step7:Specifysoilmaterialproperties Step7:Specifysoilmaterialproperties
Selectalateralpy modelofmediumdensesandofinterest.
Thebearingstiffnessinthesoilcapinteractioniscontrolledbythelateralpy modelof
theFBMultiPierprogram;internalfrictionangleandsubgrade modulusarethekey
parametersinordertocomputethebearingstiffnessofcohesionlesssoilwhereas
undrainedshearstrength(=cohesion)isusedastocomputethebearingstiffnessfor
cohesivesoil.
Soilpage
UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA
E n g i n e e r i n g
C i v i l & C o a s t a l
Soilproperties
Step8: Step8:Modifytheaxialsoilmodels Modifytheaxialsoilmodels
Apilelengthof5ftischoseninthemodel.
Setvaluesforultimateskinfrictionofthesoilaxialmodel(tz curve)andaxialbearing
failureloadofthesoiltipmodel(qz curve)equaltoasmallmagnitude,e.g.,0.001psf
and 0 001 kips By doing so the axial resistance of the pile becomes negligible At and0.001kips.Bydoingso,theaxialresistanceofthepilebecomesnegligible.At
minimum,onepilemustbeincludedinthemodel.
Tipproperties(Qzcurve)
UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA
E n g i n e e r i n g
C i v i l & C o a s t a l
Axialproperties(Tzcurve)
Step9: Step9:Validationoftheresults Validationoftheresults
Forthisparticularexample,FBMultiPiersolutionprocesscanconvergewithatolerance
of0.01kipofwhichthefoundationissubjectedtoanaxialloadof200kipsandresulting
displacementis0.1076in.Withanappliedloadgreaterthan1000kips,convergence
fails for a tolerance of 0 1 kip as the theoretical ultimate bearing capacity of the failsforatoleranceof0.1kipasthetheoreticalultimatebearingcapacityofthe
foundationiscomputedas0.0720ksi,whichisequivalenttoanappliedloadof1002.5
kipstoasquareshallowfoundationwithasizeof118inX118in.
UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA
E n g i n e e r i n g
C i v i l & C o a s t a l
Step9: Step9:Validationoftheresults Validationoftheresults
UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA
E n g i n e e r i n g
C i v i l & C o a s t a l
Step10: Step10:Interpretationofthedata Interpretationofthedata
Thedatafromallshellelementsconsistofshearandmoment.Itisimportanttonote
thatthemomentsandshearresultsareperunitlengthofplate.Forexample,unitof
momentiskNmperm(orkipinperininUScustomaryunit)andunitofsheariskN per
m (or kips per in) m(orkipsperin).
Moment(My)contour
UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA
E n g i n e e r i n g
C i v i l & C o a s t a l
FBMultiPier3Dresultswindow
3.TheoreticalbasisofFB 3.TheoreticalbasisofFBMultiPierFEAmodel MultiPierFEAmodel
TheoryandImplementationofnonlinearsoilstructureinteraction
3.1Computationofsoilresistance:Newmarks solutionofBoussinesqs equation
3 2 Constitutive relationship: Hyperbolic model by Duncan and Chang 3.2Constitutiverelationship:HyperbolicmodelbyDuncanandChang
3.3Homogenezation ofheterogeity:Averagingmethods
Threedimensional view of variation of
UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA
E n g i n e e r i n g
C i v i l & C o a s t a l
Threedimensionalviewofvariationof
stressinelasticmedium
3.1Computationofsoilresistance(1/3) 3.1Computationofsoilresistance(1/3)
Newmarks loadcharacterization:
stressunderarectangularareaof
niform contact press re b uniformcontactpressureby
Boussinesq (1885)
UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA
E n g i n e e r i n g
C i v i l & C o a s t a l
3.1Computationofsoilresistance(2/3) 3.1Computationofsoilresistance(2/3)
Stresssuperpositionmethodisappliedtoanalyticalsolution
ofBoussinesqs equationbyNewman(1935)

Superpositiontechnique
Variationoftheinfluencefactors
beneaththecorner(red)andthecenter(blue)
UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA
E n g i n e e r i n g
C i v i l & C o a s t a l
3.1Computationofsoilresistance(3/3) 3.1Computationofsoilresistance(3/3)
Variationofinducedverticalcompressivestresses
beneatharectangularshallowfoundation
UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA
E n g i n e e r i n g
C i v i l & C o a s t a l
Threedimensionalviewofvariationofstressinelasticmedium
3.2Constitutiverelationship:hyperbolicmodel 3.2Constitutiverelationship:hyperbolicmodel
Kondners originalmodel(1963)
Hyperbolicstressstrainrelationship
DuncanandChangmodel(1970)
UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA
E n g i n e e r i n g
C i v i l & C o a s t a l
3.2Constitutiverelationship 3.2Constitutiverelationship
DuncanandChang(1970)modelisconceptually simpleand
computationallyrobust
Th f hi li i l i hi b Thetwoparametersofthisnonlinearstressstrainrelationshipcanbe
directlyobtainedfromdrainedtriaxial compressiontestofbothcohesive
andcohesionlesssoilwhereasthemodelparametersarealsoabundantly
available in the literature availableintheliterature
Limitation
Numericalinstabilitymayoccurwhenstressapproachesshearfailure
l h d h i id d i h dil Novolumechangeduetoshearstressisconsidered,i.e.sheardilatancy
Inputparametersmustbeselectedappropriatelyforsoilconditions;whatif
Nonhomogeneoussoilconditionexists
Quasi static analysis only Quasistaticanalysisonly
UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA
E n g i n e e r i n g
C i v i l & C o a s t a l
3.3 3.3Homogenezation Homogenezation ofheterogeneity ofheterogeneity
Averagingtechniquesoftheelasticmodulusofthesoilisevaluatedoveradepthof
theshallowfoundation
Bowlesweightedaveraging
method(shownintheright)
Equivalentthicknessmethod q
(predictsverycomparable
resultstoTexasA&Mloadtest)
Anisotropy averaging method Anisotropyaveragingmethod
(greatforstraininfluence
method;compatibleforstrain
energy approach) energyapproach)
UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA
E n g i n e e r i n g
C i v i l & C o a s t a l
Schematicsketchofsoillayersandthe Schematicsketchofsoillayersandthe
influencedepth( influencedepth(H) H)
On OngoingeffortsatBSI goingeffortsatBSI
Goal
Develop a versatile easy to use computational tool for design Developaversatile,easytousecomputationaltoolfordesign
engineers
Objectives
S h t S h t i fl li th d i b i i l t d i FB i fl li th d i b i i l t d i FB M ltiPi M ltiPi Schemertmanns Schemertmanns influencelinemethodisbeingimplementedinFB influencelinemethodisbeingimplementedinFBMultiPier MultiPier
expectedreleasedate: expectedreleasedate:May/2012 May/2012
Makebothstressandstraininfluencemethodsavailableforengineersto
minimize uncertainty in characterization of soil stiffness minimizeuncertaintyincharacterizationofsoilstiffness
Provideengineerswithawelldocumentedvalidationusingrelevantinsituand
loadtestresults,i.e.,adegreeofthevalidityofthenumericalmodel
Refinethetoolbasedonfeedbackfromtheengineers continualefforts. g
UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA
E n g i n e e r i n g
C i v i l & C o a s t a l