) 1D Consolidation Analysis and Design - SoilWorks

SoilWorks
1D Consolidation Analysis & Design

MIDAS Geotechnical Engineering Seminar
NEW POSSIBILITY,
DESIGN YOUR FUTURE
Seongwan Bae
2013.04.04
MidasIT
Part 1. Definitions
......... 03
Part 2. Analytical Overview
......... 08
Part 3. Process of Softground Design
......... 18
Part 4. Case Study
......... 20
Part 5. Conclusions
......... 53
Part 1. Definitions
Soft Ground
Geotechnical Solution for Practical Design
Compressible deposits such as Clay, silty Clay,clayey Silt.

Very low permeability
Initial and long term settlement
http://en.midasuser.com
Part 1. Definitions
Classification of Clay
Classification of Clay
Terzaghi & Peck (1967)
Very Soft
Szechy & Varga (1978)
Very Soft
SPT(N)
qc(tf/m2)
Soft
Medium
Stiff
Very Stiff
Hard
Stiff
Very Stiff
Hard
815
1530
30
1530
3060
60
SoftMedium
24
48
515
[Classification of Clay by Terzaghi & Peck]
Part 1. Definitions
Problems in Soft Ground
Initial and long term settlements

during and after construction
Differential settlement on
adjacent structures, services(road)
Heaving or Boiling
Reduction of bearing capacity
Part 1. Definitions
Softground Improvement Methods
http://www.penta-ocean.co.jp/english/business/civil/softground.html
8
Part 1. Definitions
......... 03
......... 08
......... 18
Part 4. Case Study
......... 20
Part 5. Conclusions
......... 53
Overview
[ 1D Consolidation]
[ FEM Consolidation]
10
Settlement Calculation (Initial Settlement)
Sand
[ De Beer Method) ]
[ B.K. Houng Graph Method ]
11
Settlement Calculation (Primary Consolidation)
[ Notation and Terminology used forOedometer Compression

Curves (fromBalasubramaniam & Brenner, 1981) ]
12
Settlement Calculation (Primary Consolidation)
Type
Compression Index (Cc)

method
Volumetric Compression
Index (mv) method
Initial Pore Ratio (eo) method
Used when consolidation test

cases are few or none and
when
an
approximate
settlement calculation using
physical
properties
is
performed.
The level of variation of mv in

the overconsolidated domain
is high, which results in a
large margin of errors. But
the level is relatively good in
the normally consolidated
domain.
In case a large amount of test

data renders a big variation in
the
e-logP
curve,
the
settlement calculation by this
theoretical method is rather
difficult. It is not commonly
used in practice.
Schematic
Diagram
Settlement
Calculation
Remarks
13
Settlement Calculation (Rebound of Cohesive Soil)

Type
Compression Index (Cc)

method
Volumetric Compression
Index (mv) method
Initial Pore Ratio (eo) method
In the method, the rebound

is calculated using the
removed stress and,
the slope of the e-logP curve
after the removal of the load.
In the method, the rebound

is calculated using the
removed stress and,
Mv after the removal of the
load.
In the method, the rebound is

calculated using the void ratios
before and after removal of the
load.
Schematic
Diagram
Rebound
Calculation
Remarks
14
Settlement Calculation (Secondary Consolidation)

[Relation between Secondary Compression Ration and Water

Content (fromMesri, 1973) ]
15
Rate of Settlement (Degree of Consolidation)
[ Example of Degree of Consolidation Curve for Construction Stage Analysis ]
[ Degree of Consolidation]
[ Rate of Settlement]
16
Calculation of Strength Increase
Type
Skempton
Hansbo
Triaxial Compression Test
IP = Plastic Index
WL = Liquid Limit
= Friction angle from CU Test
Empirical
Equations
Type
Strength Increment Ratio (m)
Clay
0.25 ~ 0.30
Silt
0.30 ~ 0.45
silty Clay
0.25 ~ 0.40
Peat
0.35 ~ 0.50
17
Calculation of Strength Increase Stability Analysis

Analysis
Method
Simplified
Bishop
Simplified
Janbu
Spencer
Morgenstern Price
Sarma
(Vertical)
Vertical F
Equilibrium
Horizontal F
Equilibrium
Moment
Equilibrium
Advantages
Disadvantages
Reduction in computing
time
Appliable for circular and
non-circular failure surface
Inaccurate against
horizontal force
Reduction in computin time

Optimized for shallow
failure surface
Conservative Results
(F.S.)
Appliable for circular and

non-circular failure surface
Consider more accurate
than simplified method
Need more iteration

Possible to estimate the

internal vertical force
Consider more accurate
than Janbu
Need more iteration

Applicable for rock slope

A modification of MP which
reduces the iterations
Need more iteration

18
Part 1. Definitions
......... 03
......... 08
......... 18
Part 4. Case Study
......... 20
Part 5. Conclusions
......... 53
Process of Softground Design
Check Design Criteria

Total Construction Period
Design level of embankment
Design Criteria
(Allowable Residual Settlement)
Site Investigation
Determine Material Properties
Boring Test
Lab Test
-Consolidation Test
-UU,CU Test
Cc , Cv , Ch
E0 , Pc , Kv , Kh
Sa
Check Improvement Methods
Stability Analysis
1D Consolidation Analysis
Max.height of embankment
Construction Stage
Check Reinforcement
Settlement and Duration

Residual Settlement
Drainage / Preloading Method
Compare Reinforcement
SCP / GCP
Conterweight Fill
Check Points
-Material properties
-Stability
-Waterlevel, site condition
-Effect
-Duration
-Economy, Constructability
Determine Improvement Method

Determine Reinforcement
Determine Drainage/Preloading
Compare Drainage
Plastic Board Drain
Pack Drain
Sand Drain
Fiber Drain
Construction,
Monitoring and Control
20
Part 1. Definitions
......... 03
......... 08
......... 18
Part 4. Case Study
......... 20
Part 5. Conclusions
......... 53
Part 4. Case Study
Plan drawing of Soft Ground

6
1st Zone
2
2
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
32
22
Part 4. Case Study
Preliminary Analysis
Weak Layer Thickness

Embankment Height
Embankment
Landfill
Landfill Thickness
Soft Ground
N-value
[ Model ]
Waterlevel
[ Input Data ]
Total Settlement
Consolidation Period
Type
Weak Layer
Thickness (m)
10
Embankment
Height (m)
12
15
Number of
Analysis Cases
5 X 5 X 2 = 50 case
Generated Settlement
Landfill Thickness
(m)
Residual Settlement
Softground
Properties
Top
[ Output Data ]
Bottom
[ Preliminary Analysis Cases ]
23
Part 4. Case Study
Preliminary Analysis
Weak Layer Thickness (D)
Allowable Residual Settlement (cm)
D 10m
10
10m D 30m
20
30m D
30
[ Allowable Residual Settlement ]

1
4
24
Part 4. Case Study
Parametric Analysis
Preloading Heights
Drainage Methods
1st section
2
2
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
32
25
Part 4. Case Study
Parametric Analysis
<Model>
Modeling Process : CAD section import Smart Surface Drag &Drop (Assign Material Properties)
1D Consolidation Analysis
Multi Analysis
Parametric Analysis for Max. Drain Spacing
Parametric Analysis for Min. Preloading Height
Smart Result
Result Analysis -> Report Generation

Softground Slope Coupled Analysis
26
Part 4. Case Study
Parametric Analysis modeling process
Copy &
Paste
Smart Surface(SS)
Drag & Drop

(Assign Material)
Set Calculation Point
27
Set
Waterlevel
Create Analysis
Cases
Part 4. Case Study
Copy & Paste
Smart Surface(SS)
Drag & Drop

(Assign Material)
28
Set
Waterlevel
Create Analysis
Cases
Part 4. Case Study
Copy & Paste
Smart Surface(SS)
Drag & Drop

(Assign
Material)
29
Set
Waterlevel
Create Analysis
Cases
Part 4. Case Study
Copy & Paste
Smart Surface(SS)
Drag & Drop

(Assign Material)
Set Calculation
Point
30
Set
Waterlevel
Create Analysis
Cases
Part 4. Case Study
Copy & Paste
Smart Surface(SS)
Drag & Drop

(Assign Material)
31
Set
Water
level
Create Analysis
Cases
Part 4. Case Study
Copy & Paste
Smart Surface(SS)
Drag & Drop

(Assign Material)
32
Set Water
level
Create
Analysis
Cases
Part 4. Case Study
Parametric Analysis Result Analysis
33
Part 4. Case Study
Preloading Heights
Preloading Heights
34
Part 4. Case Study
Preloading Heights
Preloading Heights
Height Increase /
Number of Increment
2
Analysis Cases for Each
Increment
35
Part 4. Case Study
Preloading Heights
Results Analysis
Analysis of Preloading
Analysis Results
36
Part 4. Case Study
Preloading Heights
Scheduled construction
Degree of
Occurred
Residual
Allowable
Remarks
period(day)
consolidation (%)
settlement (m)
settlement (m)
settlement(m)
730
74.54
0.7974
0.2723
0.1000
NG
[ Settlement calculation results for scheduled construction period]
Degree of consolidation (%)
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
99
Duration (day)
371
445
530
627
741
882
1063
1318
1755
2769
Occurred settlement (m)
0.5884
0.6418
0.6953
0.7488
0.8023
0.8558
0.9093
0.9628
1.0162
1.0590
Residual settlement (m)
0.4814
0.4279
0.3744
0.3209
0.2674
0.2139
0.1605
0.1070
0.0535
0.0107
[Degree of consolidation consolidation period settlement calculation results]
37
Part 4. Case Study
Preloading Heights
P/L height
Section
Duration (day)
Degree of
Occurred
consolidation
90%
settlement (m)
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
1.40
1.60
1.80
2.00
1318
1318
1318
1318
1318
1318
1318
1318
1318
1318
0.9721
0.9812
0.9900
0.9987
1.0071
1.0153
1.0233
1.0312
1.0389
1.0464
0.0976
0.0886
0.0797
0.0711
0.0626
0.0544
0.0464
0.0385
0.0309
0.0233
Residual
settlement (m)
[Preloading Height Summary of review results of residual settlement]
Residual settlement (m)
0.2
0.1
85%
90%
95%
0
-0.1
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
P reloading height (m)
2.5
[Preloading Height estimate for designated degree of consolidation]

38
Part 4. Case Study
Drain Spacing
Drainage Methods,
Reinforcement Methods,
Drain Spacing
Drainage Methods,
Drain Spacing
39
Part 4. Case Study
Drain Spacing
Construct PBD
Drain Spacing
Analysis Cases for Each

Spacing
40
Part 4. Case Study
Drain Spacing
Results Analysis
Analysis of Drain Spacing

Analysis Results
41
Part 4. Case Study
Drain Spacing - PBD

Degree of
Occurred
Residual
Allowable
Remarks
period(day)
consolidation (%)
settlement (m)
settlement (m)
settlement(m)
730
74.54
0.7974
0.2723
0.1000
NG

Allowable
Degree of
Occurred
Residual
settlement (m)
settlement (m)
residual settlement
(m)
Remarks
consolidation (%)
0.90m x 0.90m
95.69
1.0236
0.0461
0.1000
OK
1.10m x 1.10m
91.63
0.9802
0.0895
0.1000
OK
1.30m x 1.30m
88.05
0.9419
0.1278
0.1000
NG
1.50m x 1.50m
85.24
0.9118
0.1579
0.1000
NG
1.70m x 1.70m
83.10
0.8889
0.1808
0.1000
NG
Spacing
[ Improvement period for check is based on 730 date]

42
Part 4. Case Study
Drain Spacing - SCP

Degree of
Occurred
Residual
Allowable
Remarks
period(day)
consolidation (%)
settlement (m)
settlement (m)
settlement(m)
730
74.54
0.6598
0.2253
0.1000
NG

Allowable
Degree of
Occurred
Residual
settlement (m)
settlement (m)
residual settlement
(m)
Remarks
consolidation (%)
1.60m x 1.60m
94.40
0.7519
0.0446
0.1000
OK
1.80m x 1.80m
91.61
0.7448
0.0682
0.1000
OK
2.00m x 2.00m
89.03
0.7349
0.0906
0.1000
OK
2.20m x 2.20m
86.79
0.7247
0.1103
0.1000
NG
2.40m x 2.40m
84.92
0.7154
0.1271
0.1000
NG
Spacing
[ Improvement period for check is based on 730 date]

43
Part 4. Case Study
Softground-Slope Coupled Analysis
Strength Increase,
Slope Stability for each construction stage
44
Part 4. Case Study
45
Part 4. Case Study

1
Create Slope
Models
Guide Message
46
Part 4. Case Study
Top Clay Surface
Material Properties for

each surface
Increase Parameters
47
Part 4. Case Study

Slope Module
1st stage stability
2nd stage stability
48
3rd stage stability
4th stage stability
Part 4. Case Study
Estimate the Max. heights of embankment during construction
Softground
Slope
Softground
Slope
Module
Module
Module
Module
Single Stage Model
Max.Height of 1st
Multi Stage Model
Max.Height of 2nd
Create Slope Model
stage
Create Slope Models
49
stage
Part 4. Case Study
Max. heights of embankment for 1st stage
Softground
Slope
Softground
Slope
Module
Module
Module
Module
Single Stage Model
Max.Height of 1st
Multi Stage Model
Max.Height of 2nd
Create Slope Model
stage
Create Slope Models
50
stage
Part 4. Case Study
Estimate the Max. heights of embankment during construction
Softground
Slope
Softground
Slope
Module
Module
Module
Module
Single Stage Model
Max.Height of 1st
Multi Stage Model
Max.Height of 2nd
Create Slope Model
stage
Create Slope Models
51
stage
Part 4. Case Study
Max. heights of embankment for 2nd stage
Softground
Slope
Softground
Slope
Module
Module
Module
Module
Single Stage Model
Max.Height of 1st
Multi Stage Model
Max.Height of 2nd
Create Slope Model
stage
Create Slope Models
52
stage
Part 4. Case Study
What if take the same time to model..?
2
53
Part 1. Definitions
......... 03
......... 08
......... 18
Part 4. Case Study
......... 20
Part 5. Conclusions
......... 53
Part 5. Conclusions
Conclusions
Design Criteria
In terms of both serviceability and costs
Site Investigation
Geological information and reliable parameters for analysis
Design Process
Ensure both stability of embankment and residual settlements
Monitoring
Performance of embankment during and after construction
55
SoilWorks - Vision
SoilWorks
SoilWorks is
Time is
Money
Time
56
SoilWorks - Vision
International SoilWorks
57
SoilWorks - Vision
International SoilWorks
- 2013
58
SoilWorks
Engineering Solution Partner
59

) 1D Consolidation Analysis and Design - SoilWorks

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

) 1D Consolidation Analysis and Design - SoilWorks

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SoilWorks

1D Consolidation Analysis & Design

1D Consolidation Analysis & Design

Part 2. Analytical Overview

Part 3. Process of Softground Design

Part 4. Case Study

Geotechnical Solution for Practical Design

Compressible deposits such as Clay, silty Clay,clayey Silt.

Geotechnical Solution for Practical Design

Szechy & Varga (1978)

[Classification of Clay by Terzaghi & Peck]

Problems in Soft Ground

Geotechnical Solution for Practical Design

Initial and long term settlements

Softground Improvement Methods

Geotechnical Solution for Practical Design

1D Consolidation Analysis & Design

Part 2. Analytical Overview

Part 3. Process of Softground Design

Part 4. Case Study

Part 2. Analytical Overview

Geotechnical Solution for Practical Design

Part 2. Analytical Overview

Settlement Calculation (Initial Settlement)

Geotechnical Solution for Practical Design

[ B.K. Houng Graph Method ]

Part 2. Analytical Overview

Settlement Calculation (Primary Consolidation)

Geotechnical Solution for Practical Design

[ Notation and Terminology used forOedometer Compression

Part 2. Analytical Overview

Settlement Calculation (Primary Consolidation)

Geotechnical Solution for Practical Design

Compression Index (Cc)

Initial Pore Ratio (eo) method

Used when consolidation test

The level of variation of mv in

In case a large amount of test

Part 2. Analytical Overview

Settlement Calculation (Rebound of Cohesive Soil)

Compression Index (Cc)

Initial Pore Ratio (eo) method

In the method, the rebound

In the method, the rebound

In the method, the rebound is

Part 2. Analytical Overview

Settlement Calculation (Secondary Consolidation)

[Relation between Secondary Compression Ration and Water

Part 2. Analytical Overview

Rate of Settlement (Degree of Consolidation)

Geotechnical Solution for Practical Design

[ Example of Degree of Consolidation Curve for Construction Stage Analysis ]

Part 2. Analytical Overview

Calculation of Strength Increase

Geotechnical Solution for Practical Design

Triaxial Compression Test

= Friction angle from CU Test

Strength Increment Ratio (m)

Part 2. Analytical Overview

Calculation of Strength Increase Stability Analysis

Reduction in computin time

Appliable for circular and

Need more iteration