Ground Bearing Power

[BetonArt Yapı]

Hello, While we are designing on the Safety stress in TDY 2007 in the foundation design, we are designing based on the principle of Bearing Power in the New Regulation. Do we need to divide the Soil Bearing Power by any coefficient in the report from the ground workers? Like the Safety stress in the old regulation. My reason for asking TBDY 2018 16.8.2. Strength Coefficients for Shallow Foundations and 16.8.3 Bearing Strength of Shallow Foundations titles. Good work...

 

[MaFiAMaX]

Hello, If the report says characteristic soil bearing capacity (qk), you need to divide by the strength coefficient in table 16.2. If is called the basic design strength (qt), it is already the divided value. There is also conceptual confusion in the ground survey reports at the moment. If there is an explanation that you cannot be sure of, ask them directly by e-mail in writing. See also:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[BetonArt Yapı]

Hi, If the report says characteristic soil bearing capacity (qk), you need to divide by the strength coefficient in table 16.2. If foundation design strength (qt) ], it is already split value. There is conceptual confusion in the ground survey reports at the moment. If there is an explanation that is not sure, ask them directly by e-mail. See also:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Thank you for your reply Mr. Erhan.

 

[SCETCHER]

good work. Is it not against the laws of physics that the soil bearing capacity values are very different in two parcels side by side? For example, in an area where the soil safety stress is around 1.6 kg/cm2 according to the same material standards and TDY 2007 conditions; In the 1st parcel; ZC - DTS 2 - Bks 6 - DF 2 - qk:5,4 kg/cm2 - bed coefficient: 2200 t/m3 - T01: 0.28- T02 0.64 - Z. Judge Pery: 0.43 sec in 2 parcels; ZC - DTS 2 - Bks 6 - DF 2 - qk:23.6 kg/cm2 - bed coefficient: 2400 t/m3 - T01: 0.32- T02 0.72 - Z. dominant Pery: 0.48 sec values were measured. reported by the same firm in two plots. Our qt for parcel 1 is: 5.40 kg/cm2 /1.4 = 3.8 kg/cm2 = 38 t/m2 our qt for parcel 2 is: 23.6 kg/cm2 /1.4 = 16.8 kg/ Isn't it a bit against the laws of physics to take cm2 = 168 t/m2?

 

[Apocalpyse]

good work. Isn't it against the laws of physics that the soil bearing capacity values of two parcels side by side are very different. For example, according to the same material standards and tdy 2007 conditions, the ground safety stress is around 1.6 kg/cm2 in a region with 1st parcel; ZC - DTS 2 - Bks 6 - DF 2 - qk:5,4 kg/ cm2 - bed coefficient: 2200 t/m3 - T01: 0.28- T02 0.64 - Z. dominant Pery: 0.43 sec in 2 parcels ZC - DTS 2 - Bks 6 - DF 2 - [ size=5]qk:23.6[/size] kg/cm2 - bed coefficient: 2400 t/m3 - T01: 0.32- T02 0.72 - Z. dominant Pery: 0.48 sec values were measured. It was reported by the same company in two plots. Our qt value for plot 1 is: 5.40 kg/cm2 /1.4 = 3.8 kg/cm2 = 38 t/m2 our qt value for plot 2 : 23.6 kg/cm2 /1.4 = 16.8 kg/cm2 = 168 t/m2, isn't it a bit against the laws of physics?

Example from my own geotechnical report

Static and each of the loading cases including the earthquake effect. It has been calculated that the safe carrying capacity should not exceed 1350 KN/m2. However, 350 KPa was chosen as the safe bearing capacity value to be used in static calculations since this value would exceed the allowable settlement limits.