CE 632 Settlement 2009 Handout

CE-632
Foundation Analysis and

Design
Settlement of Foundation
Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant
Settlement
Settlement
S = Se + Sc + Ss
Immediate Primary Secondary

Settlement Consolidation Consolidation
Se Sc Ss
Immediate Settlement: Occurs immediately after the construction.

This is computed using elasticity theory (Important for Granular soil)
Primary Consolidation: Due to gradual dissipation of pore pressure
induced by external loading and consequently expulsion of water from
the soil mass, hence volume change. (Important for Inorganic clays)
Secondary Consolidation: Occurs at constant effective stress with
volume change due to rearrangement of particles. (Important for
Organic soils)
For any of the above mentioned settlement calculations, we first need vertical
stress increase in soil mass due to net load applied on the foundation 2
Elasticity
1
Stress Distribution: Concentrated load

Boussinesq Analysis
Stress Distribution: Concentrated load

Boussinesq Analysis
Where,
Vertical Stress: Concentrated load
0.5
0.4
0.3
Influence Factor for
IB General solution of vertical stress
0.2
P
0.1 σz = IB
0.0
z2
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4
r z 6
2
Vertical Stress: Uniformly Distributed Circular Load

Uniformly Distributed Circular Load
Vertical Stress: Uniformly Distributed Circular Load

Rigid Plate on half Space
Vertical Stress: Rectangular Area
3
Vertical Stress: Rectangular Area
10

Pressure Bulb
Square Footing Strip Footing
11
Pressure
Bulb for
Square
Foundation
12
4
Pressure
Bulb for
Circular
Foundation
13
Newmark’s Chart
Influence Value
This Model is good for normally-consolidated, lightly

overconsolidated clays, and variable deposits 14
Newmark’s Chart
Point of
stress
calculation
Depth = z2
Determine the depth, z, where you

wish to calculate the stress increase
Adopt a scale as shown in the figure
Draw the footing to scale and place Depth = z1
the point of interest over the center
of the chart
Count the number of elements that
fall inside the footing, N
Calculate the stress increase as:
15
5
Westergaard’s Method
Provided solution for layered soils
Point Loads
Assumption:
Elastic soil mass is laterally reinfrced by numorous,
closely spaced, horizontal sheets of negligible thickness
but infinite rigidity, that allow only vertical movement but
prevent the mass as a whole from undergoing
p g g anyy lateral
strain.
P ⎡ ⎤2 1 − 2ν
σz = ⎢ 2
1
⎥ C=
2π z ⎢ C + ( r z ) ⎥
2 2 2 (1 −ν )
⎣ ⎦
This Model is specially good for pre-compressed or

overconsolidated clays 16
Westergaard’s influence Chart
17
Fröhlich Chart with

Fröhlich
concentration factor
m‘ = 4
Δσ z = n ( 0.005 ) .q
This Model is specially good for

Sands
18
6
Simplified Methods (Poulos

(Poulos and Davis, 1974)
Circular Foundation:
⎡ ⎛ 2 −1.5 ⎤
⎞
⎛ B ⎞
Δσ z = ⎢1 − ⎜1 + ⎜ ⎟ ⎟ ⎥ (q − σ zD
′ )
⎢ ⎝ ⎝ 2 z ⎠ ⎟⎠ ⎥
⎜
⎣ ⎦
Square Foundation:
⎡ ⎛ 2
⎞
−1.76
⎤
⎛ B ⎞
Δσ z = ⎢1 − ⎜ 1 + ⎜ ⎟⎟ ⎟ ⎥ (q − σ ′ )
⎢ ⎜ ⎜ 2z ⎟ ⎥ zD
⎢⎣ ⎝ ⎝ f ⎠ ⎠ ⎥⎦
19
Simplified Methods (Poulos

(Poulos and Davis, 1974)
Strip Foundation:
⎡ ⎛ 2
⎞
−2.60
⎤
⎛ B ⎞
Δσ z = ⎢1 − ⎜ 1 + ⎜ ⎟⎟ ⎟ ⎥ (q − σ ′ )
⎢ ⎜ ⎜ 2z ⎟ ⎥ zD
⎢⎣ ⎝ ⎝ f ⎠ ⎠ ⎥⎦
Rectangular Foundation:
−( 2.60 − 0.84 B / L )
⎡ ⎛ 1.38 + 0.62 B / L
⎞ ⎤
⎛ B ⎞
Δσ z = ⎢⎢1 − ⎜1 + ⎜ ⎟⎟ ⎟ ⎥ (q − σ ′ )
⎥
⎜ ⎜⎝ 2 z f ⎟
zD
⎠
⎣⎢ ⎝ ⎠ ⎦⎥
20
Approximate
Methods
B.L
Rectangular Foundation: Δσ z = q
( B + z ).( L + z )
B2
Square/Circular Foundation: Δσ z = q
(B + z)
2
B
Strip Foundation: Δσ z = q
(B + z) 21
7
Contact Pressure and Settlement distribution
Cohesive Soil - Flexible Footing Granular Soil Flexible Footing
Cohesive Soil - Rigid Footing Granular Soil - Rigid Footing

22
Elastic settlement of Foundation

H H
∫ ( Δσ − μ s Δσ x − μ s Δσ y ) dz
1
Elastic settlement:
Se = ∫ ε z dz = z
0
Es 0
Es = Modulus of elasticity
H= Thickness of soil layer
μs = Poisson’s ratio of soil
Elastic settlement for Flexible Foundation:
Se =
qB
Es
(
1 − μ s2 I f )
If = influence factor: depends on the rigidity and shape of the foundation
Es = Avg elasticity modulus of the soil for (4B) depth below foundn level
23
24
8
E in kPa
25
26

Soil Strata with
Semi-infinite depth
27
9
Steinbrenner’s Influence Factors for Settlement of the Corners of

loaded Area LxB on Compressible Stratus of μ = 0.5,
0.5, and Thickness Ht
28
Strain Influence Factor Method for Sandy Soil: Schmertmann

and Hartman (1978)
z2 C1 = Correction factor for foundation depth
(
Se = C1C2 q − γ D f
Iz
E
Δz )∑ ⎡1 − 0.5 γ D f ( q − γ D f ) ⎤
⎣ ⎦ { }
0 s
C2 = Correction factor for creep effects
⎡⎣1 + 0.2 log ( time in years 0.1) ⎤⎦
q For square and circular foundation:
For foundation with L/B >10:
Interpolate the values for 1 < L/B < 10 29
Example
z2
Se = C1C2 ( q − γ D f ) ∑
Iz
γ D f = 31.39 kN m2 Δz
0 Es
For square and

circular foundations
Es ≈ 2.5qc
For rectangular
foundations
Es ≈ 3.5qc
Correlation with SPT data:
Es ≈ 800 N′′ in kPa
30
10
Burland and Burbidge’s Method for Sandy Soils

Depth of Stress Influence (z'):
If N60'‘ is constant or increasing with depth, then z ′ = 1.04 ( B )
0.75
,where B is in meters
If N60'‘ is decreasing with depth, use smaller of
z′ = 2 B and z′ = z ′′ = Thickness of soft layer below foundation
Elastic Settlement (Se):

1 25 ( L B ) ⎤
2
⎡ 1.25 where B is in meters
Se = α1α 2α 3 Bq′ ⎢ ⎥
⎣⎢ 0.25 + ( L B ) ⎦⎥
and q′ is in kPa
α1 = 0.0047 for NC sand Compressibility Index: α 2 = 1.71 ( N ′′ )

1.4
for NC sand
0.0016 for OC sand with qna ≤ po‘
= 0.57 ( N ′′ ) for OC sand
1.4
0.0047 for OC sand with qna ≤ po‘
z ′′ ⎛ z ′′ ⎞ q′ = qna for NC sand and for OC sand with qna ≤ po‘

α3 = ⎜2− ′ ⎟ ≤1
z′ ⎝ z ⎠ q′ = qna − 0.67 po′ for OC sand with qna ≤ po‘
31
Settlement due to Primary Consolidation

⎛ σ ′ + Δσ av′ ⎞
For NC clay (σ c′ < σ o′ < σ o′ + Δσ av′ ) Sc =
Cc H c
log ⎜ o ⎟
1 + eo ⎝ σ o′ ⎠
For OC clay (σ o′ + Δσ av′ < σ c′ ) Cs H c ⎛ σ o′ + Δσ av′ ⎞
Sc = log ⎜ ⎟
1 + eo ⎝ σ o′ ⎠
⎛ σ c′ ⎞ Cc H c ⎛ σ ′ + Δσ av
′ ⎞
For OC clay (σ o′ < σ c′ < σ o′ + Δσ av′ ) Sc =
Cs H c
log ⎜ ⎟ + log ⎜ o ⎟
1 + eo ⎝ σ o′ ⎠ 1 + eo ⎝ σ c′ ⎠
σ o′ = Average effective vertical stress before construction
′ =
Δσ av Average increase in effective vertical stress
σ c′ = Effective pre-consolidation pressure
eo = Initial void ratio of the clay layer Δσ t′
Cc = Compression Index
Δσ m′
Cs = Swelling Index
Hc = Thickness of the clay layer
1
Δσ av
′ = ( Δσ t′ + 4Δσ m′ + Δσ b′ ) Δσ b′
6 32
Settlement Correction for Effect of 3-

3-D Consolidation
( Sc )3 D = λ ( Sc )1D
33
11
Fox’s Depth Correction

Factor for Rectangular
Footings of (L)x(B) at
Depth (D)
( Sc )Embedded
= Depth factor
( Sc )Surface
Rigidity Factor as per

IS:8009--1976
IS:8009
Total settlement of
rigid foundation
Total settlement at the center
of flexible foundation
Rigidity factor = 0.8

34
Time Rate of Settlement

cv t Assumption of pore pressure
St = Si + USc T= distribution under the given
Ht 2 stress conditions
For open
clay layer
with two
way
drainage
use curve
for V=1
35
Settlement Due to Secondary Consolidation
Cα H c ⎛t ⎞
Ss = log ⎜ 2 ⎟
1 + ep
Void Ratio, e
⎝ t1 ⎠
Δe
Cα = Secondary Compression Index =
log ( t2 t1 ) ep
e p = Void ratio at the end of primary consolidation Δe

t1 t2
H c = Thickness of Clay Layer Time, t (Log scale)
Secondary consolidation settlement is more important in the

case of organic and highly-compressible inorganic clays
36
12
Total Settlement
from SPT Data
for Cohesionless
soil
Multiply the settlement

by factor W'
37
Total Settlement from CPT Data for Cohesionless soil

H t ⎡ σ o + Δσ ⎤
St = ln ⎢ ⎥
C ⎣ σo ⎦
3⎛ q ⎞
C= ⎜ c ⎟
2 ⎝ σo ⎠
Depth profile of cone resistance

can be divided in several
segments of average cone
resistance
Average cone resistance can

be used to calculate constant of
compressibility.
Settlement of each layer is

calculated separately due to
foundation loading and then
added together
38
Plate Load Test – IS:1888

IS:1888--1982
39
13

IS:1888--1982
Bearing Plate:
Rough mild steel bearing plate in circular or square shape
Dimension: 30 cm, 45 cm, 60 cm, or 75 cm.
Thickness > 25 mm
Smaller size for stiff or dense soil. Larger size for soft or loose soil
Bottom of the plate is grooved for increased roughness.
Concrete blocks may be used to replace bearing plates.
40

IS:1888--1982
Test Pit:
Usually to the depth of foundation level.

Width equal to five times the test plate
Carefully leveled and cleaned bottom.
Protected against
g disturbance or change
g in natural formation
Plan
Section
41

IS:1888--1982
Procedure:
Selection of Location
Based on the exploratory boring.
Test is carried out at the level of proposed foundation. If water table is
below the foundation level but the depth is less than width of plate
then the test is carried out at the level of water table. If the water table
is above the foundation level then the water level is reduced to
proposed foundation level by pumping out the water during the test;
however, in case off high permeability material perform
f the test at the
level of water table.
In case the soil is expected to have significant capillary action and the
water table is within 1 m below the foundation, it becomes necessary
to perform the test at the level of water table in order to avoid the
effect of higher effective stresses due to capillary action resulting in
lower values of interpreted settlements.
Reaction supports should be at least (3.5 x width of plate) away from the
test plate location, and loading arrangement should provide sufficient
working space.
Test plate should be placed over a 5 mm thick sand layer and it should be
centered with the loading arrangement.
42
14

IS:1888--1982
Procedure: (Contd.)
A seating pressure of 7 kPa is applied and then released after some time
before the test.
Loads are applied in the increments of approximately 1/5th of the
estimated ultimate safe load. (Or, one may choose to increase the load at
an increment of 0.5 kN.)
At each load settlement is recorded at time intervals of 1, 2, 4, 6, 9, 16, 25
min
i and
d th
thereafter
ft att intervals
i t l off one hour.
h
For clayey soil, the load is increased when time settlement curve shows
that the settlement has exceeded 70-80% of the probable ultimate
settlement or a duration of 24 Hrs.
For the other soils, the load is increased when the settlement rate drops
below 0.02 mm/min.
The minimum duration for any load should, however, be at least 60 min.
Dial gauges used for testing should have at least 25 mm travel and 0.01
mm accuracy.
The load settlement curve can then be platted from settlement data.
43
Plate Load Test – Load

Load--Settlement Curve
Zero Correction:
The intersection of the early straight line or nearly straight line with zero load
line shall be determined and subtracted from the settlement readings to allow
for the perfect seating of the bearing plate. 44
Plate Load Test – Load

Load--Settlement Curve
Terzaghi and Peck (1948):
Sf = Settlement of a foundation of
⎡ B f ( B p + 30 ) ⎤
2
Sf width Bf (cm)
=⎢ ⎥
S p ⎢ B p ( B f + 30 ) ⎥ Sp = Settlement of the test plate of
⎣ ⎦ width Bp (cm) at the same load
intensity as on the foundation
Bond (1961):
Soil Index - n
n Clay 1.03 to 1.05

Sf ⎡ Bf ⎤ Sandy clay 1.08 to 1.10
=⎢ ⎥ Loose sand 1.20 to 1.25
S p ⎣⎢ B p ⎦⎥
Medium sand 1.25 to 1.35
Dense sand 1.40 to 1.50
45
15
Plate Load Test: Some Considerations

The width of test plate should not be less
than 30 cm. It is experimentally shown that
the load settlement behavior of soil is
qualitatively different for smaller widths.
The settlement influence zone is much
larger for the real foundation sizes than Soft soil
that for test plate, which may lead to gross layer
misinterpretation
i i t t ti off expected
t d settlement
ttl t
for proposed foundation.
The foundation settlements in loose sands are usually much larger than what
is predicted by plate load test.
Plate load test is relatively short duration test and gives mostly the immediate
settlements. In case of granular soils the immediate settlement is close to
total settlements. However, due to considerable consolidation settlement in
case of cohesive soils, the plate load test becomes irrelevant in such case.
Although the following relationship is suggested
for interpreting the settlements in cohesive soils, S f Bf
it can not be used seriously for design. =
S
p B
p
46
Plate Load Test: Bearing Capacity

In case of dense cohesionless soil and highly cohesive soils ultimate bearing
capacity may be estimated from the peak load in load-settlement curve.
In case of partially cohesive soils and loose to medium dense soils the ultimate
bearing capacity load may be estimated by assuming the load settlement curve
so as to be a bilinear relationship.
47
Plate Load Test: Bearing Capacity

A more precise determination of
bearing capacity load is possible
if the load-settlement curve is
plotted in log-log scale and the
relationship is assume to be
bilinear. The intersection point is
taken as the yield point or the
bearing capacity load.
quf Bf
For cohesioless soil Æ =
qup Bp
For cohesive soil Æ quf = qup
48
16
Modulus of
Sub--grade
Sub
Reaction
49
Differential Settlement
Terzaghi’s recommendation:
Differential settlement should not exceed 50% of the total settlement calculated for the foundation.
Considering the sizes of different footing, the following criteria is suggested for buildings:
Differential settlement of footing > 75% of max calculated settlement of footing
For raft foundation the requirements shall be more stringent and they may designed for the
g criteria
following
Differential settlement of raft footing > 37% of max calculated settlement of raft footing
L
δ
Δ Δ
Δ= maximum settlement
δ= differential settlement
δ/Δ = angular distortion
Allowable maximum and differential settlements as prescribed by

IS:1904-1986 are given on the next slide 50
51
17
Rotation of Footings Subjected to Moment

Footings subjected to moment will have the tendency to rotate and
the amount of rotation can be estimated by assuming that the
footing is supported on a bed of springs and using the modulus of
sub-grade reaction theory.
Modulus of sub-grade reaction:

Q
Es
M k=
(
B 1 −ν 2 )
Moment about the base due to
L soil reaction:
LB 3 kθ
L ( k .θ ).dx =
B2
M = 2∫
0 12
52
Rotation of Footings Subjected to Moment

Influence factor
to compute
rotation of
θ=
12 M 12 M 1 −ν
=
2
=
(
1 −ν 2 M
Iθ
) ( ) footing
3 2
LB k LB Es Es LB 2
Iθ values
53
Allowable Bearing Pressure
Maximum bearing pressure that can be applied on the

soil satisfying two fundamental requirements
Bearing capacity with adequate factor of safety

– net safe bearing capacity
Settlement within permissible limits (critical in most cases)

– net safe bearing pressure
54
18
Allowable Bearing
Pressure
Terzaghi and Peck (1967):
⎛ B + 0.3 ⎞
2
qnρ = 1.37 ( N ′′ − 3) ⎜ ⎟ Rw′ RD1S a

2 ⎝ 2B ⎠
kN m
Sa in mm and all other
dimensions in meter.
Sa = Permissible settlement in mm.

(25 mm)
⎛ Dw − D f ⎞
Rw′ = 0.5 ⎜ 1 +
⎜ ⎟⎟ [ Rw′ ≤ 1
⎝ Df ⎠
RD1 = depth correction factor

Df
= 1 + 0.2 ≤ 1.2
B
55

Peck, Hanson, and Thornburn (1974):
N-values are corrected for dilatancy and overburden

Initial straight line Æ safe bearing capacity with FOS =2
Later horizontal portion Æ permissible settlement of 25 mm.
Allowable bearing pressure from settlement consideration:

qa − net = 0.44Cw N ′′Sa S a = Permissible settlement in mm. (25 mm)
⎛ Dw ⎞
kN m 2 Cw = water table correction = 0.5 + 0.5 ⎜
⎜ D f + B ⎟⎟
⎝ ⎠ 56

Teng’s (1962) Correlation:
Net safe bearing pressure
⎛ B + 0.3 ⎞ ′
2
qnρ = 1.4 ( N cor − 3) ⎜ ⎟ RwCD S a

Sa in mm and all other
2 ⎝ 2B ⎠ dimensions in meter.
kN m
Df
CD = depth correction factor = 1 + ≤2
B
N cor = C N .N
⎛ 1.75 ⎞
CN = ⎜ ⎟ for 0 < (σ o′ Pa ) ≤ 1.05
⎝ σ o′ Pa + 0.7 ⎠
⎛ 3.5 ⎞
CN = ⎜ ⎟ for 1.05 < (σ o′ Pa ) ≤ 2.8
⎝ σ o′ Pa + 0.7 ⎠
σ o′ = Effective Overburden stress
57
19

Meyerhof’s (1974) Correlation:
Net safe bearing pressure
qnρ = 0.49 N ′′RD1S a kN m 2 for B ≤ 1.2 m
⎛ B + 0.3 ⎞
2
qnρ = 0.32 N ′′RD 2 ⎜ ⎟ Sa kN m2 for B > 1.2 m

⎝ B ⎠
RD1 = depth correction factor RD 2 = depth correction factor
Df Df
= 1 + 0.2 ≤ 1.2 = 1 + 0.33 ≤ 1.33
B B
Bowel’s (1982) Correlation:

qnρ = 0.73 N ′′RD1S a kN m2 for B ≤ 1.2 m
⎛ B + 0.3 ⎞
2
qnρ = 0.48 N ′′RD 2 ⎜ ⎟ Sa kN m 2 for B > 1.2 m

⎝ B ⎠
N-value corrected for overburden using bazaraa’s equation, but
the N-value must not exceed field value 58

IS Code recommendation: Use total settlement correlations with SPT
data to determine safe bearing pressure.
Correlations for raft foundations:

Rafts are mostly safe in bearing capacity and they do not show much
differential settlements as compared to isolated foundations.
Teng’s Correlation: qnρ = 0.7 ( N ′′ − 3) Rw′ CD Sa kN m 2
Peck, Hanson, and Thornburn (1974): qa − net = 0.88Cw N ′′S a kN m 2
Correlations using CPT data:

Meyerhof’s correlations may be used by substituting qc/2 for N,
where qc is in kg/cm2.
59
Net vs. Gross Allowable Bearing Pressure
Soil Soil
Df t
Dc
Gross load
Qg = Qc + B 2 Dcγ c + B 2 ( D f − Dc ) γ
Qc
qg = + Dcγ c + tγ c
B2
Qg Q
qg = =
Qc
+ γ D f + Dc ( γ c − γ ) qn = qg − γ D f = c2 + γ c ( Dc + t ) − γ D f
B2 B2 B
Q Usually Dc+t is much smaller than Df
qn = qg − γ D f = c2 + Dc (γ c − γ ) Qc
B qn = − γ Df
(γ c − γ ) is small, so it may be neglected B2
Qc
Q
qn = c2 ≤ qa − net + γ D f
B B2
Qc
Qc ≤ qa − gross
2
≤ qa − net B2
B 60
20

CE 632 Settlement 2009 Handout

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

CE 632 Settlement 2009 Handout

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CE-632

Foundation Analysis and

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Immediate Primary Secondary

 Immediate Settlement: Occurs immediately after the construction.

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Stress Distribution: Concentrated load

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Stress Distribution: Concentrated load

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Vertical Stress: Concentrated load

Vertical Stress: Uniformly Distributed Circular Load

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Vertical Stress: Uniformly Distributed Circular Load

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Vertical Stress: Rectangular Area

Vertical Stress: Rectangular Area

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

This Model is good for normally-consolidated, lightly

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

 Determine the depth, z, where you

This Model is specially good for pre-compressed or

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Westergaard’s influence Chart

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Fröhlich Chart with

This Model is specially good for

Simplified Methods (Poulos

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Simplified Methods (Poulos

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Contact Pressure and Settlement distribution

Cohesive Soil - Flexible Footing Granular Soil Flexible Footing

Cohesive Soil - Rigid Footing Granular Soil - Rigid Footing

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Elastic settlement of Foundation

Elastic settlement for Flexible Foundation:

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Elastic settlement of Foundation

Elastic settlement of Foundation

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Elastic settlement of Foundation

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Elastic settlement of Foundation

Steinbrenner’s Influence Factors for Settlement of the Corners of

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Strain Influence Factor Method for Sandy Soil: Schmertmann

q For square and circular foundation:

For foundation with L/B >10:

Interpolate the values for 1 < L/B < 10 29

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

For square and

Burland and Burbidge’s Method for Sandy Soils

Elastic Settlement (Se):

α1 = 0.0047 for NC sand Compressibility Index: α 2 = 1.71 ( N ′′ )

z ′′ ⎛ z ′′ ⎞ q′ = qna for NC sand and for OC sand with qna ≤ po‘

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Settlement due to Primary Consolidation

Foundation Analysis and Design: Dr. Amit Prashant

Settlement Correction for Effect of 3-

Fox’s Depth Correction

Immediate Settlement: Occurs immediately after the construction.

Determine the depth, z, where you

Depth profile of cone resistance

Average cone resistance can

Settlement of each layer is

Usually to the depth of foundation level.

Maximum bearing pressure that can be applied on the