Professional Documents
Culture Documents
com
SIGMA/W has not as yet reached the level of rigor proposed by Vu and Fredlund, in which four different
elasticity moduli are required. Different values are required for the soil-grain structure and the water and
whether the effective stress change is due to a total stress change arising from external loading or due to
changes in suction arising from infiltration, for example.
The SIGMA/W formulation includes two moduli E and H, which for saturated conditions are related as
follows:
E
H
1 2v
When Poissons ratio is a 1/3, H = 3E.
This relationship becomes more complex for unsaturated conditions, but currently SIGMA/W adopts this
relationship for both saturated and unsaturated conditions. H is computed internal to SIGMA/W only E
is specified. The effect of this simplification is discussed further in the context of the swelling simulations
presented below.
Observationally, it is evident that desiccated soils are much stiffer than when the moisture content is near
saturation. This behavior can be captured in SIGMA/W with a user-specified function where the soil
stiffness E is a function of the vertical effective stress.
The objective of this example is to compare the SIGMA/W simplified approach with results obtained by
Vu and Fredlund from their much more rigorous formulation, and to determine if reasonable heave
predictions can be made with the current SIGMA/W formulation.
2 Feature highlights
GeoStudio feature highlights include:
Using the fully coupled formulation in SIGMA/W for fully unsaturated conditions and where
the effective stress changes arise due to infiltration as opposed to surface loads
Analyzing the pore-pressure changes arising from the infiltration independently with
SEEP/W and then using the SEEP/W pore-pressures in SIGMA/W to compute, in an
uncoupled procedure, the associated volume changes
Making the E modulus a function of the vertical effective stress
symmetric axis
4
Elevation - m
3
Regina clay
2
-1
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Distance - m
The initial suction is 400 kPa (Activation PWP = -400 kPa in the insitu analysis).
The 400 kPa suction is maintained along the bottom during the infiltration with a specified boundary
condition equal to a pressure head of -40.787 m (400 kPa / 9.807).
The infiltration is specified as a flux boundary equal to 0.00173 m/day = 1.73 mm/day.
The total unit weight of the soil is 17.27 kN/m3.
Poissons ratio is 0.4.
An estimate of the data presented by Vu and Fredlund, the E-modulus at a suction of 400 kPa is about
20,000 kPa. Based on this, the E-function for this analysis is assumed to vary linearly with the vertical
effective stress as in Figure 3.
The volumetric water content function (Figure 4) and hydraulic conductivity function (Figure 5) are also
approximations based on information provided by Vu and Fredlund.
Regina E function
20000
Effective E-Modulus (kPa)
15000
10000
5000
0
0 100 200 300 400
Regina W-C
0.52
0.50
0.48
Vol. Water Content (m/m)
0.46
0.44
0.42
0.40
0.38
0.36
0.34
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000
Regina K function
0.01
X-Conductivity (m/day)
0.001
0.0001
0.00001
0.1 1 10 100 1000
Total
stress : 0
3 day
Y (m)
2
Effective
stress : 0
day
1
0
0 100 200 300 400 500
(kPa)
-100
-15
0
-20
0
-25
0
-300
-350
The surface heave along the top surface starting at the center of the building is shown in Figure 9.
0.04
0.035
Y-Displacement (m)
0.03
0.025
0.02
0.015
0.01
0.005
0
0 5 10 15
X (m)
-100
-15
0
-20
-25 0
0
-350
Figure 11 shows the heave with time along the top surface from the volume change analysis.
0.04
0.035
Y-Displacement (m)
0.03
0.025
0.02
0.015
0.01
0.005
0
0 5 10 15
X (m)
The surface heave from the un-coupled analysis is slightly less than from the coupled analysis at early
times (Figure 12) but the results merge by Day 175 (Figure 13).
35
30
25
Heave (mm)
20
Coupled
15
Uncoupled
10
0
0 5 10 15
Distance (m)
Figure 12 Comparison of surface heave at Day 43: coupled versus uncoupled analysis
45
40
35
30
Heave (mm)
25
Coupled
20
Uncoupled
15
10
0
0 5 10 15
Distance (m)
Figure 13 Comparison of surface heave at Day 175: coupled versus uncoupled analysis
Figure 16 compares the SIGMA/W coupled and un-coupled solutions with the Vu and Fredlund solution.
The Vu and Fredlund formulation, albeit more rigorous, compares well with the SIGMA/W coupled and
uncoupled results. In fact, the close agreement between solutions is rather encouraging considering the
differences in the formulations.
35
30
25
Heave (mm)
20
15 Coupled
Uncoupled
10
Vu and Fredlund (2006)
0
0 50 100 150 200
Time (days)
The SIGMA/W formulation is not rigorously complete, but in spite of this, the results compare favorably
with other more rigorous formulations.
A key to obtaining reasonable results is to ensure that the E modulus is a function of the effective stress.
The results obtainable from SIGMA/W are realistic, especially when considering the accuracy with which
the initial suctions and material properties can be specified for field conditions. In fact, considering the
natural heterogeneity of field conditions and material properties, the results of analyses like this should at
best be considered an estimate of the volume change that may take place.
10 Reference
Vu, H.Q. and Fredlund, D.G. (2006) Challenges to Modelling Heave in Expansive Soils, Canadian
Geotechnical Journal, Vol. 43, No. 12, pp. 1240-1272