Figure 1
The scheme of the impact of adjacent foundations on each other.
Table 1
Analytical values of resistance for each design approach.
| Analytical formula | BC value for B = 1 m | BC value for B = 2 m | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Approach 1 – perfectly cohesive soil | 185.86 kPa | 185.86 kPa | |
| Approach 2 – purely frictional soil | 1108.41 kPa | 1538.08 kPa | |
| Approach 3 – cohesive-frictional soil | 697.43 kPa | 734.77 kPa |
Source: Author’s contribution.
Figure 2
The adopted numerical model.
Source: Author’s contribution.
Figure 3
Node displacement results for a deterministic task with foundation spacing 0.9–8 m.
Source: Author’s contribution.
Table 2
Soil parameters for a perfectly cohesive approach.
| Mean value | Standard deviation | Distribution | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cohesion (c) | 36.3 kPa | 19.6 kPa | Lognormal |
| Friction angle () | — | — | Deterministic |
| Unit weight () | — | — | Deterministic |
Source: Author’s contribution.
Table 3
Soil parameters for non-cohesive approach.
| Mean value | Standard deviation | Distribution | Distribution parameters | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cohesion (c) | 1 kPa | — | Deterministic | |
| Friction angle () | 35° | — | Bounded | |
| Unit weight () | 19 kN/m3 | — | Deterministic |
Source: Author’s contribution.
Table 4
Soil parameters for the cohesive-friction soil approach (TBC).
| Mean value | Standard deviation | Distribution | Distribution parameters | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cohesion (c) | 36.3 kPa | 19.6 kPa | Lognormal | |
| Friction angle () | 20° | Bounded | ||
| Unit weight ) | 19 kN/m3 | — | Deterministic |
Source: Author’s contribution.
Figure 4
Analytical and numerical results for deterministic values of soil parameters for each approach: (a) ideal cohesive, (b) purely frictional, and (c) TBC.
Source: Author’s contribution.
Figure 5
Normalised analytical and numerical results for deterministic values of soil parameters for each approach: (a) ideal cohesive, (b) purely frictional, and (c) TBC.
Source: Author’s contribution.
Figure 6
Mean BC for probabilistic values of soil parameters for each approach: (a) ideal cohesive, (b) purely frictional, and (c) TBC.
Source: Author’s contribution.
Figure 7
BC COV for probabilistic values of soil parameters for each approach: (a) perfectly cohesive, (b) purely frictional, and (c) TBC.
Source: Author’s contribution.
Figure 8
Performance efficiency factor for all approaches (A1 – Approach 1 – perfectly cohesive; A2 – Approach 2 – purely frictional; A3 – Approach 3 – TBC).
Source: Author’s contribution.
Figure 9
Probability of failure. (a and b) Approach 1 – perfectly cohesive soil, (c and d) Approach 2 – purely frictional soil, and (e and f) Approach 3 – cohesive-frictional soil (TBC).
Source: Author’s contribution.