Teori Kapasitas

Dukung Tanah
1

Definisi-definisi
The bearing capacity is the limiting pressure
that the footing can support.

Foundation: Structure transmits loads to the

underlying ground (soil).

Footing:

Slab element that transmit load from

superstructure to ground

Embedment depth, Df : The depth below

the ground surface where the base of the footing

rests.

Bearing pressure(q): The normal stress

impose by the footing on the supporting ground.

(weight of superstructure +
self weight of

Definisi-definisi

Bearing Capacity
Failure

Transcosna Grain
Elevator Canada (Oct.
18, 1913)

West side of foundation sank 24-ft

Kegagalan Kapasitas
Dukung
a) General Shear Failure

[Keruntuhan geser
umum]
Tipe keruntuhan
yang paling umum; terjadi
umumnya pada tanah yang
kuat dan batuan

b) Local Shear Failure

[Keruntuhan geser lokal]
Kondisi antara keruntuhan
umum dan keruntuhan
tumbukan
c) Punching Shear Failure
[keruntuhan geser
tumbukan] terjadi pada
pasir sangat lepas dan
lempung lunak

Bearing Capacity Failure

General shear failure

Local shear failure

Punching shear
failure

Bearing Capacity Failure

in Sand

Load vs Displacement
(after Vesic (1973)
a) General Shear Failure
b) Local Shear Failure
c) Punching Shear Failure

10

Komentar mengenai
keruntuhan geser
Biasanya hanya perlu menganalisis keruntuhan
kapasitas umum
Keruntuhan geser lokal dan punching biasanya
dapat diantisipasi pada analisis penurunan
[settlement]
Keruntuhan fondasi dangkal umumnya merupakan
kegagalan penurunan [settlement]; namun
Keruntuhan kapasistas dukung harus dianalisis
meskipun dalam prakteknya keruntuhan geser
tidak lebih dominan dari kegagalan atau
keruntuhan akibat penurunan

11

Perkembangan Teori
Kapasitas Dukung Tanah
Aplikasi dari metoda keseimbangan batas awalnya
diusulkan oleh Prandtl pada analisis tumbukan pada suatu
massa tipis logam
Metoda dari Prandtl's di adopsi oleh Terzaghi untuk analisis
Kapasitas dukung fondasi dangkal.
Vesic dan beberapa ilmuan lain memperdalam Teori asli
Terzaghi's dan menambahkan beberapa faktor-faktor untuk
analisis fondasi dangkal yang lebih lengkap.
Analisis fondasi dangkal baik kapasitas dukung maupun
penurunan lebih dilengkapi dengan metoda numerik [e.g.
FE analisys]

12

Asumsi-asumsi Metoda
Terzaghi

1. Kedalaman fondasi adalah kurang atau

sama dengan lebarnya.
2. Tidak terjadi slip antara dasar fondasi
dengan tanahnya [dasar fondasi kasar]
3. Tanah di bawah fondasi homogen dan
semi infinite
4. Mohr-Coulomb model berlaku pada
tanah
5. Keruntuhan geser umum adalah mode
keruntuhan yang menentukan (Tapi
bukan satu-satunya mode keruntuhan)

13

Assumptions for Terzaghi's

Method
6. Belum terjadi konsolidasi pada tanah
7. Fondasi relatif sangat rigid [kaku]
dibandingkan tanahnya
8. Tanah diatas dasar fondasi tidak memiliki
kekuatan gesar; hanya sebagai beban
merata [surcharge load] terhadap beban
guling [overturning load]
9. Beban yang bekerja adalah beban tekan dan
bekerja vertikal pada centroid fondasinya
10.Tidak ada beban momen yang bekerja

14

Failure Geometry for Terzaghi's

Method
[Geometri keruntuhan pada Metoda Terzaghi]

15

Failure Geometry for Terzaghi's

Method
[Geometri keruntuhan pada Metoda Terzaghi]

16

Failure Geometry for Terzaghi's

Method
[Geometri keruntuhan pada Metoda Terzaghi]

17

Since Terzaghi neglected the shear strength of

soils between the ground surface and a depth D,
the shear surface stops at this depth and the overlying
soil has been replaced with the surcharge pressure
zD .This approach is conservative, and is part of the
reason for limiting the method to relatively shallow
foundations (D < B).
Terzaghi developed his theory for continuous
foundations (i.e., those with a
very large L/B ratio).
This is the simplest case because it is a twodimensional problem.
He then extended it to square and round foundations
by adding empirical coefficients obtained from model
tests and produced the following bearing capacity
formulas:

18

For square foundations:

N q 0.4 B N
qult 1.3 cN c zD
For continuous
foundations:

qult c N c zD N q 0.5 BN

For
N 0.3 BN
q circular
1.3 c N foundations
ult

zD

19

20

Because of the shape of the failure surface, the

values of c and only need to represent the
soil between the bottom of the footing and
a depth B below the bottom. The soils
between the ground surface and a depth D are
treated simply as overburden.
Terzaghi's formulas are presented in terms of
effective stresses. However, they also may be
used in a total stress analyses by substituting cT
T and D for c', ', and D If saturated undrained
conditions exist, we may conduct a total stress
analysis with the shear strength defined as
cT= Su and T= O. In this case, Nc = 5.7, Nq =
1.0, and N = 0.0.
The Terzaghi bearing capacity factors are:

21

Contd

a 2
Nq
2 cos2 ( 45 / 2)
a e 0.75 / 360 tan
N c 5.7

for 0

Nq 1
Nc
tan

for 0

tan K p
N
1

2
2 cos

22

23

24

Untuk fondasi yang menunjukkan indikasi

keruntuhan geser lokal pada tanahnya, Terzaghi
menyarankan menggunakan rumus-rumus berikut
untuk menghitung kapasitas :

25
Dari Braja m. das

26
Dari Braja m. das

FACTOR OF SAFETY

qu
qall
FS
qall ( net )

qnet (u ) qu q
qnet (u )

q .D f

FS

Where:
qu = ultimate bearing capacity of shallow foundation
qall = allowable bearing capacity of shallow foundation
qnet(u) = net ultimate bearing capacity of shallow foundation
qall = net allowable bearing capacity of shallow foundation
FS = Factor of Safety (FS 3)

27

Notes on Terzaghi's
Method

Karena kohesi tanah sulit untuk ditentukan,

[Catatan
untuk
Metoda
Terzaghi]
maka nilai cohesi c yang konservatif
sebaiknya digunakan
Kekuatan friksi [nilai ] lebih dapat
diandalkan dan tidak perlu diambil nilai yang
konservatif seperti nilai c
Metoda Terzaghi simple dan umum digunakan
oleh praktisi geoteknik; tapi metoda ini belum
mempertimbangkan banyak faktor.

28

29

30

Further Developments
Skempton (1951)
Meyerhof (1953)
Brinch Hanson (1961)
De Beer and Ladanyi
(1961)
Meyerhof (1963)
Brinch Hanson (1970)
Vesic (1973, 1975)

31

The General Bearing Capacity

Equation.
[Mayerhof Method with combination of Hansen and
Vesic factors}]

32

Nq e

tan

tan (45 /2)

2

N c (N q 1)cot
N (N q 1)tan(1.4)
33

The General Bearing Capacity

Equation.

34

The General Bearing Capacity

Equation.

35

Other Factors

36

Other Factors [from Hansen and

Vesic]
For continuous
footing,
s=1
For perpendicular
load,
i=1
For level foundation,
b =1
For level ground,
g =1
Need to compute
factors
- Bearing Capacity Factor N,
- Depth Factor d

37

Ground water Effects

38

Ground Water Effects

Shallow groundwater affects shear strength
in two ways:
Reduces apparent cohesion that takes
place when soils
are not saturated; may necessitate reducing
the cohesion measured in the laboratory
Pore water pressure increases; reduces
both effective stress and shear strength in the
soil (same problem as is experienced with
unsupported slopes)

39

Ground Water
Effects

40

FOOTINGS WITH
ECCENTRIC
OR INCLINED LOADINGS

Eccentricity
41
Inclination

FOOTINGS WITH One Way

In most instances, foundations are subjected to moments in
Eccentricity

addition to the vertical load as shown below. In such cases the

distribution of pressure by the foundation upon the soil is not uniform.

42

43

44

FOOTINGS WITH One Way

Eccentricity
Note that in these equations, when the eccentricity e
becomes B/6, qmin is zero.
For e > B/6, qmin will be negative, which means that
tension will develop. [not good!!!]
Because soils can sustain very little tension, there will
be a separation between the footing and the soil under
it.
Also note that the eccentricity tends to decrease
the load bearing capacity of a foundation.
In such cases, placing foundation column off-center, as
shown in Figure is probably advantageous.
Doing so in effect, produces a centrally loaded
foundation with a uniformly distributed pressure.

45

FOOTINGS WITH One Way

Eccentricity

46

Footing with Two-way

Eccentricities
Consider
a footing subject to a vertical ultimate load Q

and a
moment M as shown in Figures a and b. For this case, the components
of the moment M about the x and y axis are Mx and My respectively. This
condition is equivalent to a load Q placed eccentrically on the footing
with x = eB and
y = eL as shown in Figure d.
ult

47

Footing with Two-way

Eccentricities

48

TWO-WAY ECCENTRICITY CASE 1

49

49

TWO-WAY ECCENTRICITY CASE 2

50

50

TWO-WAY ECCENTRICITY CASE 3

51

51

TWO-WAY ECCENTRICITY CASE 3

52

52

TWO-WAY ECCENTRICITY CASE 4

53

53

TWO-WAY ECCENTRICITY CASE 4

54

TWO-WAY ECCENTRICITY CASE 5

55

55

Example 1

56

Example 1

57

Example 2

58

Exampl
e2

59

Footings with Inclined

Loads

60

Footings with Inclined

1.
Compute the inclination factors using the equations
Loads
given below:
inclination of load with respect to vertical
2.

Use the inclination factors just computed to compute

Hansen shape factors as

61

Footings with Inclined

Loads
3.
These are used in the following modifications of the
"edited
Hansen bearing capacity equation:

Use the smaller value of qult computed by either of

Equations.
62

The Bearing Capacity

of Multi-Layered Soils

63

The Bearing Capacity of Layered

Soils

64

The Bearing Capacity of Layered

Soils

In layered soil profiles, the unit weight of the soil, the angle
of friction and the cohesion are not constant throughout
the depth. The ultimate surface failure may extend through
two or more of the soil layers.

Consider the case when the stronger soil is underlain

by a weaker soil. If H, the thickness of the layer of soil below
the footing, is relatively large then the failure surface will be
completely located in the top soil layer, which is the upper
limit for the ultimate bearing capacity.
If the thickness H is small compared to the foundation width
B, a punching shear failure will occur at the top soil
stratum, followed by a general shear failure in the bottom soil
layer.
65

If H is relatively deep, then the shear failure will occur only

on the top soil layer.

The Bearing Capacity of Layered

Soils and Hanna (1978) and Meyerhof(1974)
Meyerhof

66

67

68

69

70

71

 Meyerhof and
Hannas punching
shear coefficient Ks

72

The Bearing Capacity of Layered

Soils

Variatio
n of
ca/c1
with
q2/q1
based on the
theory of
Meyerhof and
Hanna (1978)

73

Example on layered soils

74

Example on layered soils

75

Example on layered soils

76

Ground Factors

77

Base Factor

For footings with angled foundation bases

When footing is level, b = 1

78

Rigidi
ty
Facto
rs

79

Bearing Capacity from Field Tests

80

Bearing Capacity from

SPT

81

Bearing Capacity from

SPT

82

Bearing Capacity from

SPT

83

Bearing Capacity
using CPT

84

Bearing Capacity for Field

Load Tests PLT

85

Bearing Capacity for Field Load

Tests PLT
For Granular Soils:

For Cohesive Soils:

86

Correction of Standard
penetration number
It has been suggested that the SPT be standardized to
some energy ratio Er which should be computed as

Note that larger values of Er decrease the blow count N

nearly linearly, that is, Er45 gives N = 20 and Er90 gives N
= 10;

Example of N for Er45 = 20 we obtain for the arbitrarily

chosen Er = 70, (Er70):
87

N for Er70 = 13