Numerical investigation on the bearing capacity of two interfering strip footings resting on a rock mass

Javid, Amir Hossein; Fahimifar, Ahmad; Imani, Meysam

doi:10.1016/j.compgeo.2015.06.005

Cited by 37 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, it should not be used for principal stress levels at which ductile failure appears [9,10]. Furthermore, it should not be used if the size of the rock blocks is larger than the structure or they have same size or if one group of discontinuities existing in the rock mass is weaker than the others [5,12].…”

Section: Constitutive Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the recent studies, Javid, Fahimifar and Imani [12] investigated the effect of the interaction between two shallow strip footings on the ultimate bearing capacity using the Hoek & Brown criterion and two-dimensional numerical analyses. It has been seen that the ratio of the bearing capacity of a strip footing under the effect of a neighboring footing to the bearing capacity of the same isolated footing is about 1.3 to 1.6.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A comparative study on the estimation of ultimate bearing capacity of rock masses using finite element and limit equilibrium methods

Koltuk

2024

Journal of Scientific Reports-A

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most rock masses are excellent foundation materials due to their bearing capacities of MPa. However, the ultimate bearing capacity of rock masses should be accurately estimated in the design of structures with high foundation loads. In this study, the ultimate bearing capacities of a strip footing built on rock masses with different geotechnical properties are determined using the finite element method (FEM) and the failure criterion of Hoek & Brown. The results of FE-analyses are compared to those obtained from the limit equilibrium methods (LEM) in the literature. It has been shown that the FEM with associated flow rule and Terzaghi`s limit equilibrium method give similar failure surfaces for most cases, and the ratio of ultimate bearing capacities determined according to the Terzaghi´s method to FEM varies between 1.5 and 4. In cases, in which the failure surfaces obtained from both methods differ, this ratio can rise up to 11.

show abstract

Section: Constitutive Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparative study on the estimation of ultimate bearing capacity of rock masses using finite element and limit equilibrium methods

Koltuk

2024

Journal of Scientific Reports-A

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Additionally, it was believed that splitting and shearing were the predominant failure modes. The bearing capacity of two interfering strip footings made of Hoek–Brown materials was examined by Javid et al ( 2015 ). In this study, interference between two neighbouring rough rigid strip footings was investigated using the finite-difference code UDEC.…”

Section: Review Of Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Bearing capacity of strip footings on jointed rock mass

Singh

Viladkar

Shekhawat³

et al. 2022

Arab J Geosci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rock masses are non-homogenous, discontinuous media composed of rock material and naturally occurring discontinuities such as joints, fractures and bedding planes. Due to the presence of the geological discontinuities such as joints, faults and bedding planes, the compressive strength and modulus of elasticity of jointed rock mass are significantly reduced and the measurement of the strength behaviour of these jointed rock masses below the foundation becomes a challenging task. Previous researches have dealt with the bearing capacity of strip footings on the jointed rock mass for concentric, eccentric, inclined loading, separately. But, very limited work has been carried out for determining the bearing capacity of footings on jointed rock mass under eccentric-inclined loading together. In this study, the behaviour of rock masses under the pressure of strip footing has been investigated. To make the problem, more realistic, eccentric-inclined load was applied on the strip footing resting on horizontal jointed rock mass. A parametric study has also been carried out to develop some non-dimensional correlation between different parameters including GSI, e/B ratio, inclination, bearing capacity, etc. Three-dimensional analysis has been carried out by the finite element method using PLAXIS 3D software. Modified Hoek–Brown criteria was used to simulate the behaviour of rock mass and elastic behaviour of foundation was taken into the consideration for analysis. From the results, it can be concluded that the bearing capacity values drop as the eccentricity of the load increases. This indicates that as the eccentricity of the load increases, the bearing capacity of jointed rock mass diminishes. The bearing capacity value decreases with increasing loading inclination with respect to vertical. In the current study, non-dimensional correlations have been developed using data from non-linear elasto-plastic FEA to forecast footing’ bearing capacity, settlement and tilt of shallow foundation. These connections rely on the inclination of the load as well as the eccentricity to breadth ratio. The results obtained from the non-dimensional correlations holds goods on comparing the results obtained from the FEM analysis.

show abstract

“…Many researchers have studied the problem by performing small-scale laboratory or field tests, as well as by conducting theoretical or numerical analyses on an unreinforced soil medium. These studies have implemented different theoretical or numerical techniques, such as a method of stress characteristics (Graham et al, 1984;Kumar and Ghosh, 2007a); upper bound limit analysis (Kumar and Kouzer, 2008;Kumar, 2008, 2010;Kumar and Ghosh, 2007b;Yang et al, 2017;Biswas and Ghosh, 2018;Keawsawasvong et al, 2021;Yodsomjai et al, 2021); lower bound limit analysis Bhattacharya, 2010, 2013;Shiau et al, 2021;Keawsawasvong and Boonchai Ukritchon, 2022); the finite difference method (Ghazavi and Lavasan, 2008;Ghosh and Sharma, 2010;Mabrouki et al, 2010;Lavasan and Ghazavi, 2012b;Javid et al, 2015;Lavasan et al, 2017); the finite element method (Lee et al, 2008;Lee and Eun, 2009;Kumar and Bhoi, 2010;Nainegali et al, 2013Nainegali et al, , 2018Nainegali et al, , 2019Noorzad and Manavirad, 2014;Zidan and Mohamed, 2019;Sekhar et al, 2020;Shokoohi et al, 2019;Fuentes et al, 2019;Ekbote and Nainegali., 2019a, b;Sekhar et al, 2020;Alzabeebee, 2020Alzabeebee, , 2022Ekbote et al, 2022); the analytical method Saran, 2003b, 2004;Ghos...…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Study on Closely Spaced Asymmetric Footings Embedded in a Reinforced Soil Medium

Ekbote,

Nainegali

2023

Ing. Inv.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In practice, footings are rarely laid on the surface or at ground level; usually, they are embedded in the soil medium. Most studies focus on surface footings. This research examines the behavior of two interfering asymmetric footings while considering their widths to be dissimilar and the effect of embedment depth to enhance the ultimate bearing capacity and limit the settlement within the working range. This was evaluated through the finite element method of the ABAQUS software. The soil was assumed to have a Mohr-Coulomb failure, and the asymmetry corresponded to the footing widths. The results are presented in terms of interference factors, i.e., the ultimate bearing capacity (UBC) and the settlement, which are defined as the UBC/settlement ratio of the left/right footing in the presence of the other one placed on reinforced soil. This, in comparison with an identical isolated footing on unreinforced soil. Interference is more significant in small footings than in large ones. Due to behavioral variations, the bearing capacity and settlement are different. This effect increases with an increase in the width of large footings, and the interference factors decrease with an increase in the embedment depth of the footings. When the right footing width is twice that of the other and considering one layer of reinforcement and soil friction angles of 30º and 40º, the percent increments in the bearing capacity of interfering left footings, for a spacing of 0,5 times the left footing width, are 104 and 148%, respectively.

show abstract

Numerical investigation on the bearing capacity of two interfering strip footings resting on a rock mass

Cited by 37 publications

References 23 publications

A comparative study on the estimation of ultimate bearing capacity of rock masses using finite element and limit equilibrium methods

A comparative study on the estimation of ultimate bearing capacity of rock masses using finite element and limit equilibrium methods

Bearing capacity of strip footings on jointed rock mass

Study on Closely Spaced Asymmetric Footings Embedded in a Reinforced Soil Medium

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About