Bearing Capacity of Soil — Terzaghi vs Meyerhof

What Is Bearing Capacity of Soil?

Bearing capacity is the soil’s fundamental promise to a structure — it defines how much load the ground can carry before something breaks, shifts, or collapses.

In geotechnical engineering, bearing capacity refers to the maximum contact pressure between a foundation and the supporting soil at which the soil mass can resist shear failure without undergoing excessive settlement. It is expressed in units of pressure — typically kN/m² (or kPa) in SI units, and t/m² in older Indian practice.

Every time a column load transfers through a footing into the earth, the soil beneath is being asked to carry that stress. If the stress exceeds what the soil can handle, one of two things happens: either the soil shears along a failure surface and the structure collapses suddenly, or it settles slowly and unevenly under a load it was never designed to carry. Both outcomes are disastrous, and both can be prevented through proper bearing capacity analysis.

In India, the governing code for determination of bearing capacity of shallow foundations is IS 6403:1981, published by the Bureau of Indian Standards. This code incorporates both Terzaghi’s classical theory and the more comprehensive Meyerhof-Vesic approach, and it remains the primary reference for all geotechnical design work in the country — from residential buildings to highway bridges to industrial structures.

Two Criteria Always Apply

Bearing capacity design must satisfy two independent criteria: (1) Shear failure — checked using Terzaghi, Meyerhof, or IS 6403:1981 equations; and (2) Settlement — checked as per IS 1904:1978. The more critical of the two governs the final footing size. Shear capacity alone is never sufficient.

Types of Bearing Capacity

Understanding the terminology is essential before working with any bearing capacity equation. These four terms are regularly confused, particularly in exam questions and design reports.

Common Mistake

Many engineers use safe bearing capacity and allowable bearing pressure interchangeably. They are not the same. The safe bearing capacity addresses shear failure only. The allowable bearing pressure is the lesser of the shear criterion and the settlement criterion. Always check both and use the smaller value.

Three Modes of Bearing Capacity Failure

The type of failure mode that occurs under a footing depends primarily on the density or consistency of the supporting soil. This distinction matters because the Terzaghi equations are adjusted differently for each mode.

1. General Shear Failure

This is the classical, well-defined failure mode. It occurs in dense sands and stiff clays. A continuous failure surface develops from the edge of the footing all the way to the ground surface on one or both sides, accompanied by visible heaving of the ground. Failure is sudden and catastrophic. This is the mode assumed in Terzaghi’s original equations, and the one used for most standard bearing capacity calculations.

Relative density: Dense sand (Dᵣ > 67%) or stiff/hard clay.

2. Local Shear Failure

In medium-dense sands and medium clays, the failure surface does not extend to the ground surface. Significant settlement occurs before failure, and the transition is gradual rather than sudden. The soil bulges slightly but does not heave dramatically. IS 6403:1981 treats φ < 28° as a local shear zone and requires the use of reduced shear parameters: c* = 0.67c and tan φ* = 0.67 tan φ.

Relative density: Medium sand (Dᵣ = 35–67%) or medium clay.

3. Punching Shear Failure

In very loose sands and soft clays, the footing simply punches into the soil without any recognisable lateral failure pattern. There is no heave, no defined failure surface — the footing just sinks progressively under load. This mode is also common for deep foundations where the failure mechanism is largely confined to the zone immediately beneath the footing tip.

Relative density: Loose sand (Dᵣ < 35%) or soft clay.

IS 6403:1981 Classification

IS 6403:1981 defines the failure zones based on the friction angle φ: φ < 28° → Local shear failure (use reduced c* and φ*); 28° < φ < 36° → Transition zone (interpolate between local and general shear factors); φ > 36° → General shear failure (use full c and φ).

Terzaghi’s Bearing Capacity Method (1943)

Karl Terzaghi — widely regarded as the father of modern soil mechanics — published his bearing capacity theory in Theoretical Soil Mechanics (1943). He was the first to provide a rigorous analytical framework for shallow foundation failure, and his equations remain foundational to geotechnical engineering education worldwide.

Key Assumptions

Terzaghi’s theory rests on several important assumptions that define when it is valid:

• The foundation is shallow — depth of embedment Df ≤ width B.
• The soil above the base of the footing acts only as a surcharge (q = γ·Df); its shear strength is ignored.
• The footing base is rough (full mobilisation of friction between soil and footing).
• The load is vertical, central, and uniformly distributed — no eccentricity, no inclination.
• Failure is by general shear (unless modified for local shear).
• Soil is homogeneous, isotropic, and semi-infinite.

Terzaghi’s Equations

Strip Footing (Infinitely Long, B/L → 0)

qᵤ = c·Nc + q·Nq + 0.5·γ·B·Nγ

c = cohesion of soil (kN/m²)
q = surcharge pressure at foundation level = γ·Df (kN/m²)
γ = unit weight of soil (kN/m³)
B = width of footing (m)
Nc, Nq, Nγ = dimensionless bearing capacity factors (function of φ only)

Square Footing (B = L)

qᵤ = 1.3·c·Nc + q·Nq + 0.4·γ·B·Nγ

Circular Footing (Diameter = B)

qᵤ = 1.3·c·Nc + q·Nq + 0.3·γ·B·Nγ

Rectangular Footing (B × L, where B < L)

qᵤ = (1 + 0.3·B/L)·c·Nc + q·Nq + (1 − 0.2·B/L)·0.5·γ·B·Nγ

Terzaghi’s Bearing Capacity Factors

The factors Nc, Nq, and Nγ are functions of the soil friction angle φ only. They are derived from the geometry of the failure wedge and the logarithmic spiral shear zones. Key values are given below:

φ (degrees)	Nc	Nq	Nγ	Failure Mode
0°	5.70	1.00	0.00	Pure cohesive
5°	7.34	1.57	0.45	Local shear zone
10°	9.61	2.69	1.22	Local shear zone
15°	12.86	4.45	2.50	Local shear zone
20°	17.69	7.44	5.00	Local shear zone
25°	25.13	12.72	9.70	Transition zone
30°	37.16	22.46	19.13	Transition zone
35°	57.75	41.44	42.92	General shear
40°	95.66	81.27	100.40	General shear

Terzaghi’s Local Shear Failure Modification

For φ < 28° (local shear failure zone), Terzaghi introduced modified shear parameters to correct for the fact that the full shear strength is not mobilised:

Reduced Parameters for Local Shear (IS 6403 / Terzaghi)

c* = (2/3)·c = 0.67c
tan φ* = (2/3)·tan φ → φ* = arctan(0.67 tan φ)

Use c* and φ* in place of c and φ when computing bearing capacity factors for local shear failure conditions.

Limitation of Terzaghi’s Method

Terzaghi’s method is only valid for vertical, centrally applied loads on level ground with shallow embedment (Df ≤ B). It does not account for inclined loads, eccentric loads, deep embedment, or sloped ground. For any of these conditions, Meyerhof’s method (or Hansen/Vesic) must be used.

Meyerhof’s Bearing Capacity Method (1951, 1963)

G.G. Meyerhof extended Terzaghi’s work significantly. His 1951 paper introduced the concept of shape factors, depth factors, and inclination factors — recognising that real-world footings are never just strip footings with perfectly vertical, perfectly centred loads. His 1963 paper refined these factors based on field test data from Canada, making the method applicable to a much wider range of practical conditions.

It is the Meyerhof framework — later refined by Vesic (1973) for the bearing capacity factors — that forms the theoretical backbone of IS 6403:1981.

The General Equation

Meyerhof’s Net Ultimate Bearing Capacity (as adopted in IS 6403:1981)

qₙᵤ = c·Nc·Sc·dc·ic + γ·Df·(Nq − 1)·Sq·dq·iq + 0.5·γ·B·Nγ·Sγ·dγ·iγ·W’

c = cohesion (kN/m²)  |  γ = unit weight (kN/m³)  |  Df = depth of foundation (m)  |  B = width (m)
Nc, Nq, Nγ = bearing capacity factors (Vesic, 1973)
Sc, Sq, Sγ = shape factors  |  dc, dq, dγ = depth factors
ic, iq, iγ = inclination factors  |  W’ = water table correction factor

Note that IS 6403:1981 uses the net ultimate bearing capacity (qₙᵤ) form, which subtracts the overburden stress γ·Df from the gross capacity. This is why the Nq term appears as (Nq − 1) in the IS formula.

Meyerhof’s Bearing Capacity Factors (as per Vesic, 1973 — used in IS 6403)

Bearing Capacity Factor Formulae

Nq = e^(π·tan φ) · tan²(45 + φ/2)
Nc = (Nq − 1) · cot φ   [For φ = 0: Nc = 5.14]
Nγ = 2·(Nq + 1)·tan φ   [Vesic, 1973]

φ (°)	Nc (Vesic)	Nq (Vesic)	Nγ (Vesic)
0°	5.14	1.00	0.00
5°	6.49	1.57	0.45
10°	8.35	2.47	1.22
15°	10.98	3.94	2.65
20°	14.83	6.40	5.39
25°	20.72	10.66	10.88
28°	25.80	14.72	16.72
30°	30.14	18.40	22.40
35°	46.12	33.30	48.03
40°	75.31	64.20	109.41

Shape Factors (IS 6403:1981, Clause 5.1.2.1)

Footing Shape	Sc	Sq	Sγ
Strip (B/L → 0)	1.0	1.0	1.0
Square (B = L)	1 + 0.2·tan²(45+φ/2)	1 + 0.2·tan²(45+φ/2)	1 − 0.4·(B/L)
Circular	1 + 0.2·tan²(45+φ/2)	1 + 0.2·tan²(45+φ/2)	0.6
Rectangular	1 + 0.2·(B/L)·tan²(45+φ/2)	1 + 0.2·(B/L)·tan²(45+φ/2)	1 − 0.4·(B/L)

Depth Factors (IS 6403:1981, Clause 5.1.2.2)

Depth Factors

dc = 1 + 0.2·(Df/B)·tan(45 + φ/2)
dq = dγ = 1 + 0.1·(Df/B)·tan(45 + φ/2)   [for φ > 10°]
dq = dγ = 1.0   [for φ = 0°]

Inclination Factors (IS 6403:1981, Clause 5.1.2.3)

Inclination Factors (for load inclined at angle α to vertical)

ic = iq = (1 − α/90°)²
iγ = (1 − α/φ)²   [valid only for φ > 0°]

α = angle of load inclination from vertical (degrees). For vertical load, α = 0 and all inclination factors = 1.0.

Meyerhof turned Terzaghi’s classical theory into a practical design tool by adding the three correction families — shape, depth, and inclination — that reflect how foundations actually behave in the field.”

IS 6403:1981 — Key Provisions for Geotechnical Engineers

IS 6403:1981 — Code of Practice for Determination of Bearing Capacity of Shallow Foundations

Published by: Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS), Civil Engineering Division, Soil and Foundation Engineering Section (CED 43).

First revision: 1981. Reaffirmed in 1997 and 2002. Still the primary governing code for shallow foundation bearing capacity in India.

Scope: Covers determination of safe bearing capacity for shallow foundations using theoretical methods (Terzaghi/Meyerhof/Vesic), plate load tests, and SPT/CPT correlations.

Complementary codes: IS 1904:1978 (permissible settlements), IS 2131:1981 (Standard Penetration Test), IS 1888:1982 (Plate Load Test), IS 8009 Part I & II (settlement calculation).

Factor of Safety as per IS 6403:1981

IS 6403:1981 requires the safe bearing capacity (qₛ) to be determined by dividing the net ultimate bearing capacity by a factor of safety. The code recommends:

Safe Bearing Capacity Formula (IS 6403:1981)

qₛ = qₙᵤ / FoS

Allowable Bearing Pressure: qₐ = qₛ + γ·Df

FoS = 2.5 — thorough investigation, low soil variability, well-defined loads
FoS = 3.0 — routine building foundations, standard site investigation (most common)
FoS = 3.0 — critical structures, major infrastructure, uncertain soil conditions

Practice Note

In routine geotechnical reports, a factor of safety of 3.0 is almost always adopted for shallow foundations. A value of 2.5 is only used when the site investigation is comprehensive — multiple boreholes, lab testing, and plate load tests — and the soil profile is relatively uniform.

Cohesive Soils (φ = 0 Condition — Undrained Analysis)

For saturated clays under rapid undrained loading (short-term stability), IS 6403:1981 specifies the use of undrained shear parameters: φ = 0 and c = cᵤ (undrained cohesion). In this case, the bearing capacity equation simplifies significantly because Nq = 1 and Nγ = 0:

Undrained Bearing Capacity for Cohesive Soils (φ = 0)

qₙᵤ = cᵤ · Nc · Sc · dc · ic

For a strip footing on level ground with vertical load: Nc = 5.14 (Vesic), all shape/depth/inclination factors = 1.0 → qₙᵤ = 5.14·cᵤ

SPT-Based Bearing Capacity (IS 6403:1981, Clause 5.3)

IS 6403:1981 also provides correlations between the Standard Penetration Test N-value and the safe bearing capacity for cohesionless soils (sands and gravels). This approach is widely used in India for preliminary design when direct shear strength tests are not available:

SPT N-value (corrected)	Soil Description	Safe Bearing Capacity (kN/m²)
< 4	Very loose sand	< 50 (not suitable for direct foundation)
4–10	Loose sand	50–100
10–30	Medium dense sand	100–200
30–50	Dense sand	200–400
> 50	Very dense sand / gravel	> 400

Note: N-values must be corrected for overburden pressure (CN correction) and, where applicable, for fine content and water table as per IS 2131:1981 before using these correlations.

Effect of Water Table on Bearing Capacity

The position of the water table has a direct and significant effect on bearing capacity, primarily by reducing the effective unit weight of soil and hence the effective overburden and self-weight terms in the equation. IS 6403:1981 handles this using water table correction factors Rw1 and Rw2.

Three Water Table Positions — IS 6403:1981 Treatment

Water Table Correction Factors

Modified equation: qₙᵤ = c·Nc·Sc·dc·ic + Rw1·γ·Df·(Nq−1)·Sq·dq·iq + 0.5·Rw2·γ·B·Nγ·Sγ·dγ·iγ

Water Table Position	Rw1 (Surcharge term)	Rw2 (Self-weight term)
Water table at or above ground surface	0.5	0.5
Water table at foundation level (Zw1 = Df)	1.0	0.5
Water table at depth B below foundation level	1.0	1.0
Water table at depth > B below foundation	1.0	1.0 (no correction needed)

Critical Point

When the water table rises to the foundation level or above, the self-weight term in the bearing capacity equation is reduced to approximately half its dry value (Rw2 = 0.5). In high rainfall regions of India — particularly coastal areas like Kerala, the western coast of Maharashtra, and the Brahmaputra plains of Assam — seasonal fluctuations in the water table can severely reduce bearing capacity. Foundation design must account for the worst-case water table position, not the average.

Terzaghi vs Meyerhof — Full Comparison

Parameter	Terzaghi (1943)	Meyerhof / IS 6403:1981
Year developed	1943	1951 (Meyerhof), 1963 (revised), 1973 (Vesic factors)
Foundation depth assumption	Df ≤ B (shallow only)	Any depth — handled by depth factors
Load inclination	✗ Not considered	✔ Inclination factors (ic, iq, iγ)
Shape factors	Empirical multipliers (1.3 for square/circular)	Analytical shape factors (Sc, Sq, Sγ)
Depth factors	✗ Not included	✔ dc, dq, dγ
Eccentric loading	✗ Not considered	✔ Effective width method (B’ = B − 2e)
Sloped ground / sloped footing base	✗ Not considered	◑ (Hansen method; IS 6403 references for such cases)
Local shear failure	✔ Reduced c* and φ*	✔ IS 6403 φ classification
Nγ formula	Terzaghi’s original (slightly different values)	Vesic (1973): Nγ = 2(Nq + 1)·tan φ
Bearing capacity result	Higher (conservative for some shapes)	More realistic — typically 5–21% lower than Terzaghi for same conditions
IS code adoption	◑ Referenced for educational/comparison	✔ Primary method in IS 6403:1981
Best suited for	Quick preliminary estimates; simple vertical loads	All foundation design — preferred for final design

Worked Numerical Examples

Example 1 – Terzaghi — Square Footing on Dense Sand

Problem: A 2.0 m × 2.0 m square footing is placed at a depth of 1.5 m in dense sand. The soil has: c = 0 (cohesionless), φ = 36°, γ = 18 kN/m³. Water table is well below the influence zone. Using Terzaghi’s method, find the (a) ultimate bearing capacity, (b) safe bearing capacity with FoS = 3.0.

Step 1 — Identify failure modeφ = 36° → φ > 36° → General shear failure. Use full c and φ values.

Step 2 — Bearing capacity factors from Terzaghi’s table (φ = 35°–36°, interpolate)At φ = 36°: Nc ≈ 63.5, Nq ≈ 47.2, Nγ ≈ 51.2 (by interpolation from standard Terzaghi table). Note: For exam purposes, many references give φ = 35°: Nc = 57.8, Nq = 41.4, Nγ = 42.9 — use the values given in the question.

Step 3 — Surcharge pressure q = γ · Df = 18 × 1.5 = 27 kN/m²

Step 4 — Apply Terzaghi’s square footing equationqᵤ = 1.3·c·Nc + q·Nq + 0.4·γ·B·Nγ
qᵤ = 1.3 × 0 × 63.5 + 27 × 47.2 + 0.4 × 18 × 2.0 × 51.2
qᵤ = 0 + 1274.4 + 737.3 =2011.7 kN/m²

Step 5 — Net ultimate bearing capacityqₙᵤ = qᵤ − γ·Df = 2011.7 − 27 = 1984.7 kN/m²

Step 6 — Safe bearing capacity (FoS = 3.0)qₛ = qₙᵤ / FoS = 1984.7 / 3.0 = 661.6 kN/m²
Allowable bearing pressure: qₐ = qₛ + γ·Df = 661.6 + 27 =688.6 kN/m²

Ultimate Bearing Capacity = 2011.7 kN/m² | Safe Bearing Capacity = 661.6 kN/m² | Allowable = 688.6 kN/m²

Example 3 – IS 6403:1981 — Rectangular Footing on c-φ Soil

Problem: A rectangular footing 3.0 m × 2.0 m is founded at a depth of 1.5 m in soil with: c = 20 kN/m², φ = 25°, γ = 17 kN/m³. Load is vertical and central. Water table is at a depth of 5 m (no correction needed). Compute the safe bearing capacity as per IS 6403:1981 with FoS = 3.0.

Step 1 — Failure mode classification (IS 6403:1981)φ = 25° → 28° > φ > 0° → Transition zone approaching local shear. Use IS 6403:1981 bearing capacity factors directly from Table 1 at φ = 25°. From IS 6403:1981 Table 1: Nc = 20.72, Nq = 10.66, Nγ = 10.88

Step 2 — Shape factors (IS 6403:1981, Clause 5.1.2.1) — rectangular, B = 2.0 m, L = 3.0 mkp = tan²(45 + φ/2) = tan²(57.5°) = 2.46
Sc = 1 + 0.2·(B/L)·kp = 1 + 0.2 × (2/3) × 2.46 = 1.328
Sq = 1 + 0.2·(B/L)·kp = 1.328
Sγ = 1 − 0.4·(B/L) = 1 − 0.4 × (2/3) = 0.733

Step 3 — Depth factors (IS 6403:1981, Clause 5.1.2.2)Df/B = 1.5/2.0 = 0.75; kp^0.5 = √2.46 = 1.568
dc = 1 + 0.2 × (Df/B) × kp^0.5 = 1 + 0.2 × 0.75 × 1.568 = 1.235
dq = dγ = 1 + 0.1 × 0.75 × 1.568 = 1.118

Step 4 — Inclination factors (vertical load, α = 0)ic = iq = iγ = 1.0

Step 5 — Surcharge and apply IS 6403:1981 net equationq = γ·Df = 17 × 1.5 = 25.5 kN/m²
qₙᵤ = 20 × 20.72 × 1.328 × 1.235 × 1 + 25.5 × (10.66−1) × 1.328 × 1.118 × 1 + 0.5 × 17 × 2.0 × 10.88 × 0.733 × 1.118 × 1
qₙᵤ = 679.3 + 365.4 + 135.4 =1180.1 kN/m²

Step 6 — Safe bearing capacityqₛ = 1180.1 / 3.0 = 393.4 kN/m²
qₐ = qₛ + q = 393.4 + 25.5 =418.9 kN/m²

Net Ultimate Bearing Capacity = 1180.1 kN/m² | Safe Bearing Capacity = 393.4 kN/m² | Allowable = 418.9 kN/m²

Example 3 – Effect of Water Table — Strip Footing on Sand

Problem: A 1.5 m wide strip footing is founded at 1.2 m depth in medium dense sand: c = 0, φ = 30°, γ_bulk = 19 kN/m³. Compute the net ultimate bearing capacity as per IS 6403:1981 for two cases: (a) water table is 5 m below ground (no effect), and (b) water table is at foundation level.

Common data — IS 6403:1981 factors at φ = 30°Nc = 30.14, Nq = 18.40, Nγ = 22.40
Strip footing: Sc = Sq = Sγ = 1.0; dc = dq = dγ = 1.0 (shallow); ic = iq = iγ = 1.0

Case (a) — Water table well below influence zone (Rw1 = Rw2 = 1.0)qₙᵤ = 0 + 19 × 1.2 × (18.40−1) × 1.0 + 0.5 × 19 × 1.5 × 22.40 × 1.0
qₙᵤ = 396.7 + 319.2 =715.9 kN/m²

Case (b) — Water table at foundation level (Rw1 = 1.0, Rw2 = 0.5)Use γ’ = γ_sat − γ_w = 19 − 9.81 = 9.19 kN/m³ for self-weight term (Rw2 = 0.5 equivalent)
qₙᵤ = Rw1·q·(Nq−1) + 0.5·Rw2·γ·B·Nγ
qₙᵤ = 1.0 × 22.8 × 17.4 + 0.5 × 0.5 × 19 × 1.5 × 22.40
qₙᵤ = 396.7 + 159.6 =556.3 kN/m²

Water table rising from 5 m depth to foundation level reduces bearing capacity from 715.9 to 556.3 kN/m² — a reduction of approximately 22%.

Presumptive Bearing Capacity Values — Indian Soils (IS 6403:1981)

IS 6403:1981 includes a table of presumptive safe bearing capacity values for preliminary design. These values are based on the soil type and condition, and are intended only as starting points. They must always be confirmed by site-specific investigation before final design.

Soil / Rock Type	Condition	Safe Bearing Capacity (kN/m²)
Soft / Medium Clay	Plastic consistency	50 – 100
Stiff Clay	Semi-firm	100 – 200
Hard Clay	Firm, stiff	200 – 400
Loose Sand	Below water table — N < 10	~100
Medium Dense Sand	N = 10–30	100 – 200
Dense Sand	N = 30–50	200 – 400
Gravel	Dense, well-graded	400 – 600
Black Cotton Soil	Medium; varies seasonally	50 – 150 (use with caution)
Laterite Soil	Hard crust	150 – 300
Soft Rock / Weathered Rock	Fractured or weathered	600 – 2000
Hard Rock (Basalt, Granite)	Fresh, sound, unweathered	3000 – 10000+

Black Cotton Soil — Special Caution

Black cotton soil (expansive clay, common in Maharashtra, MP, Karnataka, and Telangana) poses unique challenges. Its bearing capacity varies dramatically with moisture content — from reasonably firm in the dry season to nearly unusable during monsoon. Seasonal swelling and shrinkage also cause differential settlement. IS 6403:1981 presumptive values for black cotton soil must never be used without direct field testing. Foundations on black cotton soil typically require deeper embedment beyond the active zone (usually > 1.5 m) or structural modification to prevent swelling-induced damage.

Frequently Asked Questions

Summary — What Every Engineer Should Remember

On method selection: For any formal geotechnical report or final foundation design in India, IS 6403:1981 (Meyerhof-Vesic approach) is the governing method. Terzaghi’s equations are valuable for building intuition and quick preliminary estimates, but they overestimate bearing capacity in many real-world conditions.

On failure modes: Always identify the failure mode first. For φ < 28°, use reduced parameters c* and φ*. For φ > 36°, use full parameters. Transition zone requires interpolation per IS 6403.

On factor of safety: Default to FoS = 3.0 for routine work. The IS code permits 2.5 only when investigation quality justifies it — this requires explicit documentation in the geotechnical report.

On water table: Never design for current water table position. Always design for the highest anticipated water table over the life of the structure. In monsoon-prone regions, this distinction has caused real failures.

On settlement: Shear capacity check alone is never enough. Always check settlement as per IS 1904:1978 independently. In soft clays and loose sands, settlement governs long before shear failure becomes relevant.

TheCivilStudies.com — Soil Mechanics Series

Published: April 2, 2026  ·  Last reviewed: April 2, 2026

References: IS 6403:1981, IS 1904:1978, Terzaghi K. (1943) Theoretical Soil Mechanics, Meyerhof G.G. (1963) Some Recent Research on the Bearing Capacity of Foundations, Vesic A.S. (1973) Analysis of Ultimate Loads of Shallow Foundations, Das B.M. Principles of Geotechnical Engineering, Gopal Ranjan & A.S.R. Rao Basic and Applied Soil Mechanics

Related reading:   Pressure Bulb in Foundation Design  ·  Soil Mechanics Hub  ·  Building Construction

💬 Share Your Feedback