INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Jobs

FOS for slope vs bearing

FOS for slope vs bearing

(OP)
Why the factor of safety against general shear failure of a foundation is 3 while it is 1.5 against slope failure?

RE: FOS for slope vs bearing

I generally understood it as a lower FoS ( 1.5 v 3 ) means that there is more co fide ce in the accuracy of method.

Slopes are generally moment equilibrium so driving forced v resisting forces. You can calculate these forces and be reasonably confident (n geotech terms, which means they might be there they might now smile). Also these methods have been well tested and proven to be satisfactory. Or there disadvantages have been established

FoS for bearing capacity failure probably could be lowered I would think but there may not be such a need for this when contact pressures and settlement generally govern.

RE: FOS for slope vs bearing

I was looking at Google and there is a paper from Terzaghi titled "The actual factor of safety on foundations" in the UK's Institution of Structural Engineers, which I hope somebody may have a copy of it to share with us. Just looking at the title and considering that this paper is very old (30's), that paper may have some rationale about why a FOS of 3 is used in foundations.

RE: FOS for slope vs bearing

Higher FOS means less movement - a batter slope may move a few hundreds mm horizontally while still has a FOS of 1.2-1.5. However if a footing supporting a building settles a few hundreds mm that could be a failure (10-20% of footing width)

Think about SF tower settlement - my take is it's a punching failure! Piles are not holding up the high rise.

RE: FOS for slope vs bearing

Not sure if you can relate FOS with movement or settlements. As was pointed out above, FOS is just the relation between resistant forces to the acting forces. I guess that the FOS of 3 and 1.5 were picked based on actual observations of soil failures while keeping the design economically reasonable.

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources


Close Box

Join Eng-Tips® Today!

Join your peers on the Internet's largest technical engineering professional community.
It's easy to join and it's free.

Here's Why Members Love Eng-Tips Forums:

Register now while it's still free!

Already a member? Close this window and log in.

Join Us             Close