Numerical modeling of vertical drains with advanced constitutive models

Abdulazim Yildiz
*
Department of Civil Engineering, The Faculty of Engineering and Architecture, University of Cukurova, 01330 Balcali/Adana, Turkey
a r t i c l e i n f o
Article history:
Received 14 February 2008
Received in revised form 3 April 2009
Accepted 11 April 2009
Available online 9 May 2009
Keywords:
Soft clay
Embankment
Anisotropy
Destructuration
Plane strain modeling
Vertical drain
a b s t r a c t
The water ow into a vertical drain under an embankment loading is axisymmetric problem and there-
fore, the vertical drain system must be converted into equivalent plane strain model. The matching is
achieved by manipulating the drain spacing and/or soil permeability according to relatively simple rules.
This paper investigates the verication of matching approaches by comparing 2D plane strain and 3D unit
cell results when complex constitutive models are used in the nite element analyses. The numerical
results showed that the match was found to be satisfactory but not perfect. A full-scale plane strain anal-
ysis is subsequently applied to an embankment case history taken from Haarajoki, Finland, stabilized ver-
tical drains and compared with eld measurements.
2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
Natural soft clays tend to have signicant anisotropy of fabric,
developed during deposition and 1D consolidation. During subse-
quent plastic straining, the fabric anisotropy can change. Anisot-
ropy can inuence both elastic and plastic behaviors of soft clays.
In addition to anisotropy, natural clays exhibit the effect of inter-
particle bonding. When plastic straining occurs, the bonding de-
grades, referred to as destructuration. For normally consolidated
or lightly overconsolidated soft clays, plastic deformations are
likely to dominate for many problems, such as the embankment
loading considered in this paper. Advanced geotechnical design
on soft clays has often been based on nite element analysis using
isotropic elasto-plastic soil models, such as Modied Cam Clay [1].
However, neglecting the effects of anisotropy and/or destructur-
ation may lead to highly inaccurate predictions of soft clay re-
sponse in the analysis. Therefore a specic constitutive model
that is capable of accounting for anisotropy, initial structure and
destructuration process in soft clays is desirable for the analysis.
In recent years, there has been considerable development in under-
standing the behavior of soft clays and a number of elasto-plastic
constitutive models incorporating such as anisotropy and/or
destructuration effects have been published in the literature [2
6]. Most of these models, however, do not take into account the
combined effect of anisotropy and destructuration. Furthermore,
the application of these models to practical geotechnical design
is not common due to complexity and difculty of determination
of the model input parameters which may require non-standard
laboratory tests. Two recently proposed elasto-plastic constitutive
models for soft clays, S-CLAY1 [7] and S-CLAY1S [8] are used for the
simulations presented in this paper. The models account for plastic
anisotropy and anisotropy combined with destructuration, respec-
tively. S-CLAY1 is an extension of conventional critical state mod-
els, with anisotropy of plastic behavior represented through an
inclined yield surface and a rotational component of hardening
[7]. The S-CLAY1S additionally accounts for bonding between clay
particles and destructuration [8] by using the concept of intrinsic
yield surface proposed by Gens and Nova [9]. The model parame-
ters can be determined from the results of standard laboratory
tests by using well-dened methodologies. Furthermore, the mod-
els have been successfully validated against experimental data on
several natural and reconstituted clays [7,8,1014].
Prefabricated vertical drains (PVDs) are often used to speed up
consolidation and to increase shear strength under embankments
on soft soil [15]. The PVD is a slender, synthetic drainage element
comprised of a drainage core wrapped in a geotextile lter. The
PVD has a typical rectangular cross section and is installed by using
a mandrel. The installation of PVDs by means of a mandrel causes
signicant disturbance in the soil surrounding the drain. The shape
of the mandrel is also rectangular and therefore, the shape of the
actual disturbed zone is close to a rectangle or an ellipse. A proper
design of an embankment involving a large number of discrete ver-
tical drains and their own independent inuence zone should be
conducted with a fully three dimensional (3D) analysis. 3D nite
element modeling of vertical drain system is very sophisticated
and requires large computational effort when applied to a real
embankment project with a large number of PVDs [16]. 2D nite
0266-352X/$ - see front matter 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.compgeo.2009.04.001
* Tel./fax: +90 322 338 67 02; mobile: + 90 506 308 6140.
E-mail address: azim@cukurova.edu.tr
Computers and Geotechnics 36 (2009) 10721083
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Computers and Geotechnics
j our nal homepage: www. el sevi er. com/ l ocat e/ compgeo
element analyses of embankments have commonly been con-
ducted under plane strain conditions. However, the actual eld
conditions around vertical drains are truly 3D and therefore, it is
necessary to convert the vertical drain system into equivalent
plane strain condition. Several authors [1721] have shown that
vertical drains can be effectively modeled by using appropriate
matching methods to represent the typical arrangement of vertical
drains in plane strain nite element analyses. The two most useful
matching approaches from computational point of view are those
proposed by Chai et al. [18] and Hird et al. [19,21], as accounting
for the effects of the smear zones around the drains does not re-
quire separate discretisation. In this paper the matching proce-
dures proposed by Hird et al. [19,21] are used in the analyses.
According to Hird et al. [19,21], the matching procedure can be
achieved by manipulating either the drain spacing and/or soil per-
meability. However, certain simplifying assumptions are made:
each single drain is assumed to work independently, soil has a con-
stant permeability and the consolidation takes place in a uniform
soil column with linear compressibility characteristics in the ab-
sence of lateral movement. Such restrictive conditions are not
likely to be achieved in normally or lightly overconsolidated soils
under embankment loading. Furthermore, the stressstrain behav-
ior of natural soft soils is highly nonlinear and very complex due to
different fundamental features of soil, such as anisotropy, creep
and destructuration as mentioned above. Hird et al. [21] also
emphasized that validation is needed when the matching methods
are applied to practical situations where the soil behavior is non-
linear and varies with depth.
This paper studies the performance of the matching procedures
proposed by Hird et al. [19,21] when complex elasto-plastic mod-
els are used in the plane strain analyses of vertical drains. The pro-
posed methods are applied to Haarajoki test embankment
constructed on soft soils incorporating PVDs. The nite element
analyses are performed with S-CLAY1 models as well as the isotro-
pic Modied Cam Clay model (MCC). In the paper, rst, a brief
description of the constitutive model is given, followed by infor-
mation about Haarajoki test embankment, material parameters
and initial conditions, which are all required as inputs to numerical
analyses. Then, the consolidation behavior of a single drain and its
inuence zone under the embankment is analyzed for 3D case and
its equivalent plane strain conditions. Finally, a full-scale plane
strain analysis of PVD system under Haarajoki embankment is car-
ried out with the method proposed by Hird et al. [19,21] and the
results are compared with the corresponding eld observations.
2. Constitutive models
The S-CLAY1S model is a critical state model with anisotropy of
plastic behavior represented through an inclined yield surface and
a hardening law to model the development or erasure of fabric
anisotropy during plastic straining. Additionally, the model ac-
counts for destructuration. In 3D stress space the yield surface of
the S-CLAY1S model is a sheared ellipsoid (Fig. 1a), given by
f
3
2
fr
d
p
0
a
d
g
T
fr
d
p
0
a
d
g
_ _
M
2

3
2
fa
d
g
T
fa
d
g
_ _
p
0
m
p
0
p
0
0
1
where r
d
is the deviatoric stress tensor, p
0
is mean effective stress,
a
d
is a deviatoric fabric tensor (a dimensionless second order tensor
that is dened analogously to the deviatoric stress tensor, see
Wheeler et al. [7] for details), M is the value of the stress ratio at
critical state and p
0
m
denes the size of the yield surface of the nat-
ural clay. Eq. (1) shows that the generalized version of the yield sur-
face cannot be expressed solely in terms of stress invariants. Fig. 1a
illustrates the shape of the S-CLAY1S yield surface in 3D stress
space, for the case where the principal axes of both the stress tensor
and the fabric tensor coincide with the x, y and z directions.
Within the yield surface there is a notional intrinsic yield sur-
face for the equivalent unbonded soil with the same fabric, which
is assumed to be of the same shape and orientation as the real yield
surface, but smaller in size. The size of the intrinsic yield surface is
specied by a parameter p
0
mi
, and this is related to the size p
0
m
of the
yield surface for the natural soil by parameter , dening the current
degree of bonding:
p
0
m
1 vp
0
mi
2
For the simplied conditions of a triaxial test on a previously one-
dimensionally consolidated sample, it can be assumed that the
horizontal plane in the triaxial sample coincides with the plane of
isotropy of the sample. In this special case, the fabric tensor can
be replaced by a scalar parameter a dened as
a
2

3
2
fa
d
g
T
fa
d
g 3
which is a measure of the degree of plastic anisotropy of the soil.
The yield surface of the S-CLAY1S model can then be visualized
by Fig. 1b. For the sake of simplicity, the S-CLAY1S model assumes
isotropic elastic behavior of the same form as in the Modied Cam
Clay model [1], and an associated ow rule:
de
p
d
de
p
v

2g a
M
2
g
2
4
where g = q/p
0
and de
p
d
and de
p
v
are the increment of plastic deviator-
ic and volumetric strains, respectively. Experimental evidence by
Graham et al. [22] and Korhonen and Lojander [23] suggests that
this assumption is reasonable for many soft clays.
S-CLAY1S incorporates three hardening laws. The rst relates
the change in the size of the intrinsic yield surface to the plastic
volumetric strain increment de
p
v
:
dp
0
mi

vp
0
mi
k
i
j
de
p
v
5
where k
i
is the gradient of the intrinsic normal compression line (for
a reconstituted soil) in the lnp
0
-v plane (where v is the specic vol-
ume). Eq. (5) is of the same form as the equivalent hardening law in
MCC and S-CLAY1, but with p
0
m
replaced by p
0
mi
and k replaced by k
i
.
The second hardening law (the rotational hardening law) de-
scribes the change of orientation of the yield surface with plastic
straining:
da
d
x
3g
4
a
d
_ _
hde
p
v
i x
d
g
3
a
d
_ _
de
p
d
_ _
6
where g = r
d
/p
0
, de
p
d
is the increment of equivalent plastic deviator-
ic strain x and x
d
are additional soil constants. The soil constant x
d
controls the relative effectiveness of plastic shear strains in setting
the overall instantaneous target values for the components of a
d
,
whereas the soil constant x controls the absolute rate of rotation
of the yield surface towards the current target values of the compo-
nents of a
d
(see Wheeler et al. [7] for details).
The third hardening law in S-CLAY1S (the destructuration law)
describes the degradation of bonding with plastic straining. It is
similar in form to the rotational hardening law (Eq. (6)), except
that both plastic volumetric strains and plastic shear strains
(whether positive or negative) tend to decrease the value of the
bonding parameter v towards a target value of zero:
dv n 0 vjde
p
v
j n
d
0 vde
p
d
_ _
nv jde
p
v
j n
d
de
p
d
_ _
7
where n and n
d
are additional soil constants. Parameter n controls
the absolute rate of destructuration, and parameter n
d
controls
the relative effectiveness of plastic deviatoric strains in destroying
A. Yildiz / Computers and Geotechnics 36 (2009) 10721083 1073
the bonding (see Koskinen et al. [8] for details). Theoretically, as
pointed out in Zentar et al. [14], a monotonic reduction in v due
to plastic straining which modies the anisotropy and gradually
breaks the bonding due to slippage at interparticle contacts and
subsequent rearrangement and realignment of particles implied
by the hardening law (Eq. (7)) can sometimes result in reduction
of p
0
m
during hardening for certain combinations of parameters n
n
d
and v. As a result, the peak undrained shear strength of the nat-
ural soil may actually be predicted to decrease during consolidation.
There is eld evidence for such behavior on a moderately sensitive
Finnish clay, as discussed in Koskinen et al. [13].
2.1. Model parameters and initial state
The use of S-CLAY1S model requires values of eight soil con-
stants (k
i
, j, m
0
, M, x, x
d
, n and n
d
) and information on initial state
(initial values for void ratio e
0
, a
0,
v
0
and p
0
m
). Three of these are
conventional parameters (j, m
0
, M) and can be directly measured
from standard laboratory tests on undisturbed natural samples as
in the Modied Cam Clay model while the intrinsic value k
i
should
be determined from an oedometer test on a reconstituted sample.
The initial size and inclination of the yield curve (p
m
and a) can be
determined using a simple procedure that the previous history of
the soil deposit is restricted to simple 1D (K
0
) loading, and possible
unloading, to a normally consolidated or lightly overconsolidated
state (see Wheeler et al. [7] for details). If the normally consoli-
dated value of K
0
can be estimated by using Jakys simplied for-
mula (K
0
= 1sin /
0
), this can be used to calculate a
corresponding value of stress ratio g
K0
. The model predicts that
only one value of yield curve inclination a would produce 1D
straining for continuous loading at this stress ratio g
K0
, and this
therefore provides an estimate for the initial value of a. Assuming
that elastic strains are much smaller than plastic strains, which is
often true for very soft soils, 1D straining (zero lateral strain) cor-
responds to:
de
p
d
de
p
v

2
3
8
Combining the above equation with the ow rule of Eq. (4), the
yield curve inclination corresponding to 1D consolidation a
K0
is gi-
ven by:
a
K0

g
2
K0
3g
K0
M
2
3
9
There are two possible ways to determine the value of initial
amount of bonding v
0
for a natural soil [11]. A conservative esti-
mate can be obtained based on measured sensitivity, which is a
lower bound estimate of 1 + v
0
, because some proportion of the
bonding can be lost during sampling and testing. The second way
of determining a value for v
0
is based on the initial void ratio
and the size of the initial yield curve for the natural soil (e
0
and
p
0
m0
) and the position of the intrinsic normal compression line for
reconstituted soil in lnp-e space. Since different samples of the
same clay have different void ratios due to disturbance and/or vari-
ations in the sampling depth and location, the values of v
0
for dif-
ferent samples can vary signicantly and a geometrical average of
v
0
should be used. In this study, the rst method is used to deter-
mine the value of v
0
.
The parameters x and x
d
are related to the rotational harden-
ing in the S-CLAY1S model. The model parameter x
d
denes the
relative effectiveness of plastic shear strains in rotating the yield
curve. For plastic loading along any constant x
d
stress path, a will
ultimately tend to a nal equilibrium value, which can be found by
setting da = 0 in Eq. (6) and combining with Eq. (4).
x
d

3 M
2
g
2
K0

3g
K0
4
_ _
2g
2
K0
M
2
2g
KO

10
Knowledge of the value of K
0
(and hence g
K0
) can therefore be
used to determine an appropriate value for x
d
, using Eq. (10).
The model parameter x
d
controls the rate at which a tends to-
wards its current target value. It is difcult to devise a simple
and direct method for experimentally determining the value of x
for a given soil (see Wheeler et al. [7] for details). The values of
x for soft soils in this paper were estimated based on the apparent
values of k, as suggested by Zentar et al. [14].
Determination of the destructuration parameters n and n
d
re-
quires an optimization procedure by comparing the experimental
results with model simulations, as explained by Koskinen et al.
[8] and Karstunen and Koskinen [11]. The effect of parameter n
d
,
which controls the relative effectiveness of plastic deviatoric
strains in destructuration, is negligible in a triaxial test with a
stress ratio g close to zero, where the deviatoric strains are very
small. Therefore, the most appropriate value for parameter n can
be chosen rst by simulating a triaxial test with a small stress ratio,
such as an isotropic loading test. Using that value of parameter n,
the effect of parameter n
d
can then be studied by simulating a tri-
axial test with a large stress ratio g, where the deviatoric strains,
and hence the effect of parameter n
d
, are signicant.
By setting the initial value of the state parameter v to zero and
using an apparent value of k (determined from an oedometer test
on a natural clay sample), instead of the intrinsic value k
i
of a
reconstituted clay, S-CLAY1S reduces to the S-CLAY1 model that
accounts for plastic anisotropy only. Furthermore, if the initial va-
lue of the state parameter a (used for calculating the initial values
of the components of the fabric tensor) and the value of the soil
constant x are set to zero, the model ultimately reduces to the iso-
tropic Modied Cam Clay (MCC) model.
Fig. 1. S-CLAY1S yield surface in (a) 3D stress space; (b) triaxial stress space.
1074 A. Yildiz / Computers and Geotechnics 36 (2009) 10721083
3. Haarajoki test embankment
In 1997, the Finnish National Road Administration organized an
international competition to calculate and predict the behavior of a
road embankment at Haarajoki. Haarajoki Test Embankment was
built as a noise barrier in Finland. The geometry of the embank-
ment is shown in Fig. 2. The embankment is 2.9 m high and
100 m long. The crest of the embankment is 8 m wide and the
slopes have a gradient of 1:2. The data concerning site investiga-
tion and the results of the associated laboratory tests and eld
monitoring data provided by FinnRA [24] are very useful for the
validation of different constitutive models and methods of analy-
ses. The results of some nite element analyses also have been
published in the literature [2528]. Based on the ground investiga-
tion data [24] and these numerical studies [2528], Haarajoki test
embankment is founded on a 2 m thick dry crust layer overlying a
20.2 m thick soft clay deposit and the subsoil is divided into nine
sub-layers with different compressibility parameters and overcon-
solidation ratios. The water content of the soft clay layer varies be-
tween 75% and 112% depending on the depth, and is almost the
same as, or greater than, the liquid limit. The bulk density varies
from 14 to 17 kN/m
3
and specic gravity varies from 2.73 to
2.79. The undrained (undisturbed) shear strength determined by
fall cone tests and eld vane tests was between 15 and 42 kN/m
2
[24]. The Haarajoki deposits can be characterized as a sensitive
anisotropic soft soil with sensitivity values (determined with fall
cones tests) between 20 and 55. The organic content is between
1.4% and 2.2% at the depth of 313 m. Half of the embankment is
constructed on area improved with vertical drains and the other
half on natural deposits without any additional ground improve-
ment. In the improved area, the vertical drains were installed in
a regular pattern with 1 m spacing before embankment
construction.
4. Input data
The embankment, which was made of granular ll, was mod-
eled with a simple Mohr Coulomb model assuming the following
material parameters: E
0
= 40,000 kN/m
2
, m
0
= 0.35, u
0
= 40, w
0
= 0,
c
0
= 2 kN/m
2
, and c = 21 kN/m
3
(where E
0
is the Youngs modulus,
m
0
is the Poissons ratio, u
0
is the friction angle, w
0
is the dilatancy
angle and c is the unit weight of the embankment material). The
problem is dominated by the soft clay response and is hence rather
insensitive to the embankment parameters.
The values of the input parameters and state variables for the
models listed in Tables 13 were estimated for each layer based
on the laboratory results provided by FinnRA [24] using the best
practice for the determination of model and state parameters for
the S-CLAY1S model and its simplications (i.e. S-CLAY1 and
MCC). The initial values for the state parameters are shown in
Table 1. Pre-overburden pressure (POP) denes the difference
between the vertical preconsolidation stress r
0
mp
and the in situ
vertical effective stress r
0
mo
. The in situ stresses were calculated
by assuming a horizontal effective stress distribution, using K
0
8m
2.9m
1:2 1:2
2m
20.2m
2~3m
2~3m
Dry crust
Soft soil deposit
Silt
Till
GWT
Vertical
Drains
15m
Fig. 2. Cress-section of Haarajoki test embankment.
Table 2
Values for MCC soil constants.
Layer c /
0
m
0
j k M
1 17.0 36.9 0.35 0.006 0.12 1.50
2 17.0 36.9 0.35 0.009 0.21 1.50
3a 14.0 28.8 0.18 0.033 1.33 1.15
3b 14.0 28.8 0.18 0.033 1.33 1.15
3c 14.0 28.8 0.18 0.033 1.33 1.15
4 14.0 27.7 0.10 0.037 0.96 1.10
5 15.0 27.0 0.10 0.026 0.65 1.07
6 15.0 27.0 0.28 0.031 1.16 1.07
7 15.0 28.8 0.28 0.033 1.06 1.15
8 16.0 36.9 0.28 0.026 0.45 1.50
9 17.0 36.9 0.28 0.009 0.10 1.50
Table 1
The initial values for the state parameters.
Layer Depth (m) e
0
K
0
POP (kN/m
2
) a
0
v
0
1 0.01.0 1.4 1.0 76.5 0.58 4
2 1.02.0 1.4 1.0 60.0 0.58 4
3a 2.03.0 2.9 0.70 38.0 0.44 22
3b 3.04.0 2.9 0.70 34.0 0.44 22
3c 4.05.0 2.9 0.70 30.0 0.44 22
4 5.07.0 2.8 0.70 24.0 0.42 30
5 7.010.0 2.3 0.70 21.0 0.41 45
6 10.012.0 2.2 0.70 28.5 0.41 45
7 12.015.0 2.2 0.70 33.5 0.44 45
8 15.018.0 2.0 0.55 17.0 0.58 45
9 18.022.0 1.4 0.45 1.0 0.58 45
A. Yildiz / Computers and Geotechnics 36 (2009) 10721083 1075
values estimated with equation K
0
= (1 sin /
0
) OCR
sin/
0
[29],
where u
0
is the critical state friction angle in triaxial compression
and OCR is the vertical overconsolidation ratio OCR r
0
p
=r
0
mo
.
Due to natural variability, there was some scatter in the values
and for each layer average values have been chosen. The values
of permeability used for calculations were reported by Ntnen
et al. [27] based on vertical and horizontal CRS oedometer tests.
The values of j and k were determined from oedometer test re-
sults. The values for the initial inclination a
0
of the yield surface
and parameter x
d
were determined following the procedure de-
scribed in Section 2, using K
NC
0
values corresponding to Jakys sim-
plied formula. The values of x were estimated based on apparent
values of k, as suggested by Zentar et al. [14]. The use of S-CLAY1S
model requires, additionally, values for the two destructuration
parameters (n and n
d
) and information on the initial amount of
bonding v
0
. The values of k
i
need to be measured from oedometer
tests on reconstituted samples. In the absence of these tests, k
i

values were estimated throughout the deposit assuming similar
k/k
i
ratios to other Finnish clays, and similarly, past experience
on Finnish clays was used in xing the values for parameters
n and n
d
that control the rate of degradation of bonding [13]. Model
simulations of different Finnish natural clays have indicated simi-
lar values for soil constants n and n
d
[13] and typically n is about 8
12 and n
d
about 0.20.3. The initial values of v
0
were estimated
based on sensitivity (v
0
= S
t
1), as suggested in Koskinen et al.
[8]. The sensitivity values were determined with fall cones tests
and reported at FinnRA [24].
5. Numerical modeling
5.1. 3D modeling
The 3D behavior of a single drain and its inuence zone (a unit
cell) under the centerline of Haarajoki test embankment was ini-
tially investigated by a 3D nite element code PLAXIS 3D Founda-
tion V2 [30]. Three different constitutive models (MCC, S-CLAY1
and S-CLAY1S) are used to represent the soft clay behavior in the
nite element modeling. The models have been implemented into
PLAXIS program as user-dened soil models by Wiltafsky [31]. The
soil parameters and layering given in Tables 13 are used in the 3D
unit cell simulations.
The length of PVDs is 15 m and they were installed in a square
grid with 1 m spacing underneath the embankment (Fig. 3). The
drain parameters relevant for the analysis are summarized in
Table 4. In 3D unit cell analyses, a single drain is represented by
an equivalent cylindrical drain. Different equations for equivalent
drain diameter have been derived and reported in the literature
[3235]. The equivalent drain diameter (d
w
) of a rectangular
shaped drain can be calculated based on perimeter equivalence
proposed by Hansbo [32]:
d
w

2w t
p
11
where w and t are the width and thickness of the drain, respectively.
Eq. (11) has been widely used in practice and was also veried by
3D nite element analysis in this study. The equivalent drain diam-
eter (d
w
) is calculated as 67 mm based on Eq. (11). The equivalent
diameter of the mandrel (d
m
) is assumed to be 100 mm. These val-
ues of d
m
and d
w
correspond to a value of d
m
/d
w
1.5. The nite ele-
ment mesh used for the numerical simulations is illustrated in
Fig. 4. The 15-node wedge elements were used to model foundation
soils in the analysis. The 15-node wedge element is composed of
six-node triangles in horizontal direction and eight-node quadrilat-
erals in vertical direction. A total of 2160 3D elements were used in
the nite element analysis.
5.2. 2D modeling
Fig. 5 shows an axisymmetric unit cell with the total radius, R
and its equivalent plane strain unit cell with half width, B. The
effective diameter of a drain inuence was taken to be D
e
= 1.13S
for a square conguration [34] where S is the drain spacing
(Fig. 3). The equivalent drain radius (r
w
) and unit cell radius (R)
were calculated as 0.034 m and 0.565 m, respectively.
Analytical solutions already developed for consolidation of
ground improved with vertical drains invariably employ the unit
cell model (Fig. 5). The theory for radial drainage consolidation
has been developed by many researchers e.g., [3639]. Based on
Hansbos [37] solution, Hird et al. [19] showed that the average de-
grees of consolidation U, at any depth and time in the two unit cells
were theoretically identical and the axisymmetric unit cell can be
converted into equivalent plane strain unit cell (Fig. 5). Hird et al.
[19] proposed that the matching can be achieved by any one of the
following three methods:
Table 3
Values for additional soil constants for S-CLAY1 and S-CLAY1S.
Layer x
d
x k
i
n n
d
1 1.00 50 0.04 8 0.2
2 1.00 50 0.06 8 0.2
3a 0.70 20 0.38 8 0.2
3b 0.70 20 0.38 8 0.2
3c 0.70 20 0.38 8 0.2
4 0.64 20 0.27 8 0.2
5 0.60 20 0.19 8 0.2
6 0.60 20 0.33 8 0.2
7 0.70 20 0.30 8 0.2
8 1.00 20 0.13 8 0.2
9 1.00 20 0.03 8 0.2
D
e
d
w
S
w
t
S
Fig. 3. Square installation pattern and inuence zone of PVDs.
Table 4
Haarajoki test embankment. Drain properties.
Drain pattern Square net
Model SOLPACK C634
Spacing (S) 1 m
Av. width of the drain (w) 98.7 mm
Thickness at 20 kPa (t) 6.83 mm
Discharge capacity, q
w
157 m
3
/year
1076 A. Yildiz / Computers and Geotechnics 36 (2009) 10721083
(i) Geometric matching: the drain spacing is matched while
maintaining the same permeability coefcient. The geomet-
ric matching was done according to the following equation
in the absence of well resistance:
B
R

3
2
_ _
ln
R
r
s
_ _

k
h
k
s
_ _
ln
r
s
r
w
_ _

3
4
_ _ _ _ _ _1
2
12
where B is the half-width of the plane strain unit cell; R, r
w
and r
s
are the radius of the axisymmetric unit cell, the drain and the smear
zone, respectively; k
h
and k
s
are the horizontal permeability of the
undisturbed and smeared soil, respectively. Well resistance was ne-
glected in the analyses.
(ii) Permeability matching: the coefcient of permeability
is matched while keeping the same drain spacing. The
Fig. 4. Finite element mesh for 3D unit cell analyses.
(a) Axisymmetric unit cell (b) Plane strain unit cell
r
s
r
w
R
S
m
e
a
r

z
o
n
e

U
n
d
i
s
t
u
r
b
e
d

z
o
n
e

B
b
s
U
n
d
i
s
t
u
r
b
e
d

z
o
n
e

S
m
e
a
r

z
o
n
e

b
w
L L
Fig. 5. Unit cell model for 2D nite element analyses.
A. Yildiz / Computers and Geotechnics 36 (2009) 10721083 1077
permeability matching can be achieved by using the follow-
ing equation:
k
pl
k
ax

2
3 ln
R
rs
_ _

kax
ks
_ _
ln
rs
rw
_ _

3
4
_ _
_ _ 13
where k
ax
and k
pl
are the values of horizontal permeability of
axisymmetric and plain strain conditions, respectively.
(iii) Combined matching: the combination of (i) and (ii), with the
plane strain permeability calculated for a convenient drain
spacing. A value of B is preselected and then k
pl
is calculated
by using the following equation:
k
pl
k
ax

2B
2
3R
2
ln
R
rs
_ _

kax
ks
_ _
ln
rs
rw
_ _

3
4
_ _
_ _ 14
These matching procedures assume that each drain works inde-
pendently around a circular zone of inuence and soil has linear
compressibility characteristics and constant permeability in the
absence of lateral movements.
The 3D unit cell model described in 5.1 is converted into equiv-
alent plane strain unit cell according to Eqs. (12)(14) and ana-
lyzed with nite element code PLAXIS V8.2 [40] using three
elasto-plastic models (MCC, S-CLAY1 and S-CLAY1S). The problem
was discretized by using a nite element mesh with about 277
six-noded triangular elements. The soil parameters and layering gi-
ven in Tables 13 are used in the 2D plane strain simulations.
In both 3D and 2D nite element analyses, the lateral bound-
aries are restrained horizontally and the bottom boundary is re-
strained in both directions. Drainage boundaries are assumed to
be at the ground surface and at the bottom of the mesh whereas
the lateral boundaries are closed. The embankment construction
consists of two phases: rst, the embankment loading is applied
under undrained conditions, assuming the embankment to be
drained material and next, a consolidation phase is simulated via
fully coupled consolidation analysis. The construction of Haarajoki
embankment was done in 0.5 m layers, each taking 2 days, while
the foundation layer was constructed in 5 days, and the real con-
struction schedule has been simulated in the calculation. After
the construction of each layer, a consolidation phase is introduced
to allow the excess pore pressures to dissipate. Hence, a total of
twelve calculation phases were dened in the analyses. The con-
struction of embankment was completed in 35 days. After the con-
struction of last layer, the calculations have been performed until
the excess pore pressures had dissipated to a residual value of
1 kPa to nd out the nal consolidation settlement. Mesh sensitiv-
ity studies were done to conrm that the mesh was dense enough
to give accurate results for all of the constitutive models con-
cerned. In PLAXIS it is possible to decrease the permeability as
the void ratio decreases, using the formula by Taylor [41]:
log
k
k
0
_ _

De
c
k
15
where De is the change in void ratio, k is the soil permeability in the
calculation step, k
0
is the initial value of the permeability and c
k
is
the permeability change index. It was assumed in the calculations
that c
k
= 0.5e
0
[42].
6. Numerical results and comparisons
6.1. Unit cell analyses
The rst set of nite element analyses was conducted with 3D
modeling of a single drain and its inuence zone underneath the
center line of the embankment. The predicted vertical displace-
ments versus time for all models (MCC, S-CLAY1 and S-CLAY1S)
are presented in Fig. 6. Smear effect is neglected in the analysis.
Differences between the three models are relatively minor imme-
diately after construction of the embankment, but become signi-
cant during consolidation. The isotropic MCC model predicts
smaller settlements than the two anisotropic models. The S-
CLAY1S model predicts larger vertical settlements than the S-
CLAY1 model.
Although 2D equivalent plane strain analyses are subsequently
carried out for each constitutive model, the results have been illus-
trated for the MCC and S-CLAY1S models in the following analyses.
The values B and k
pl
for three matching procedures are calculated
under perfect drain conditions by using Eqs. (12)(14). The match-
ing results are presented in Table 5.
The results of equivalent plane strain analyses show that all
three matching procedures produce identical settlement response
for each constitutive model. Therefore, only the combined match-
ing procedure was adopted in the settlement analyses as it is com-
putationally most convenient and enables controlling mesh
geometry in the nite element analyses.
To verify the matching methods proposed by Hird et al. [19,21],
the predicted vertical displacements by 3D and equivalent 2D
plane strain analyses are compared for both MCC and S-CLAY1S
models in Fig. 7. It can be seen that the rate of consolidation in
the equivalent plane strain analyses is faster than that in the cor-
responding 3D analysis. Fig. 8 illustrates the differences between
the results of 3D and 2D equivalent plane strain analyses for two
constitutive models. During consolidation, the maximum differ-
ence in the predicted settlements between the 3D and equivalent
plane strain analyses is about 6.5% with MCC, while difference of
about 6% result with S-CLAY1S. The difference changes from model
to model, and varied during consolidation from 0.06% to 6.5%,
being the largest after a few months of consolidation.
Excess pore pressures (EPP) are also calculated by 3D and 2D
plane strain analyses at a depth of 5 m below the ground surface.
In the 3D numerical analyses, the values of EPP predicted by the
MCC and S-CLAY1S models are almost identical at a depth of
5 m. Hence, the values of EPP predicted by equivalent 2D plane
strain and 3D simulations are compared for only S-CLAY1S model
in Fig. 9. As expected, the values of EPP increase during the
-2.0
-1.5
-1.0
-0.5
0.0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Time (days)
S
e
t
t
l
e
m
e
n
t

(
m
)
MCC
S-CLAY1
S-CLAY1S
Fig. 6. Time settlement curves predicted by 3D nite element analyses.
Table 5
The results of matching procedures.
Geometry matching Permeability matching Combined matching
R (m) 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.57
B (m) 0.99 0.57 0.50 2.00
k
pl
/k
ax
1.00 0.32 0.26 4.07
1078 A. Yildiz / Computers and Geotechnics 36 (2009) 10721083
embankment construction and then gradually dissipate with time.
The maximum value of EPP is predicted at the end of construction.
It can be seen from Fig. 9 that the agreement between the results of
3D and 2D equivalent plane strain analyses is not satisfactory. In
addition, three matching procedures predicted different maximum
value of EPP whereas all three matching procedures produced
identical settlement response. The maximum values of EPP in the
geometry, permeability and combined matching are predicted as
about 29, 37 and 19 kN/m
2
, respectively, while the 3D model pre-
dicts a value of about 31 kN/m
2
. The excess pore pressure dissipa-
tion rate after the construction is also different from one matching
to another. This is because either geometry or soil permeability is
changed for matching taking the average degree of consolidation
into account while compressibility characteristics of soil remain
constant. Similar results were also reported by Hird et al. [19,21]
expressing that excess pore pressures in a plane strain analysis
do not matched at corresponding points in axisymmetric unit cell.
However, it can be seen that the agreement between the perme-
ability matching and 3D model is reasonably good.
Other uncertainties in the FE analysis of PVDs are related to the
well resistance and the smear zone around vertical drains. Well
resistance refers to the nite permeability of the vertical drain with
respect to the soil. The limited discharge capacity of drains can
cause a serious delay in the consolidation process. In general, lab-
oratory and eld data indicate that the discharge capacities of most
commercial PVDs have little inuence on the consolidation rate of
clay, especially for drains that are not too long [43]. For values of
q
w
> 100150 m
3
/year (in the eld) and where drains are shorter
than 30 m, there should be no signicant increase in the consolida-
tion time. According to Hansbo [44], the discharge capacity of
modern prefabricated vertical drains is considered to be high en-
ough (q
w
> 150 m
3
/year) and the effect of well resistance can be ig-
nored in the design. Hence, the effect of well resistance is neglected
in the numerical analyses presented in this study.
In the eld, installation of vertical drains by means of a mandrel
causes signicant remolding of the subsoil, especially in the imme-
diate vicinity of the mandrel. Haarajoki deposits can be character-
ized as very sensitive anisotropic soft clay. The water content is
often higher than the liquid limit. Hence, considerable disturbance
is expected in the subsoil during the installation of vertical drains.
In the numerical analyses, the permeability of soil in the disturbed
zone is reduced, because the structure of the soil is destroyed by
mechanical disturbance [45] and other properties may also be
inuenced. The extent and permeability of the smear zone are dif-
cult to determine from laboratory tests, and so far, there is no
comprehensive or standard methods to measure them. There is
no test data available about the key parameters relating to the
smear zone (d
s
/d
m
and k
h
/k
s
) for this particular soil. The extent of
the smear zone and its permeability depend on the installation
procedure, size and shape of the mandrel as well as the type and
sensitivity of soil. Several investigations have been made on these
factors [4652]. Indraratna and Redana [49] estimated smear zone
to be about (45) d
m
in the laboratory, using a large-scale consol-
idometer. Chai and Miura [50] suggested that the value of d
s
= 3d
m
can be used in practice when there are no test data for evaluating
the smear zone size. The studies of Bo et al. [51] and Xiao [52] indi-
cate that the smear zone can be as large as four times of the size of
the mandrel (d
m
), or 58 times of the equivalent diameter of drain
(d
w
). According to Jamiokowski et al. [46] the value of k
h
/k
s
can vary
from 1 to 15. Bergado et al. [48] proposed the ratio of k
h
/k
s
between
5 and 20 based on full-scale eld test. Laboratory tests may be a
correct way to determine the value of k
h
/k
s
, but they generally
underestimate the hydraulic conductivity of eld deposits because
-1.5
-1.0
-0.5
0.0
0 200 400 600
Time (days)
S
e
t
t
l
e
m
e
n
t

(
m
)
3-D analysis
2-D analysis
(a) MCC model results
-2.0
-1.5
-1.0
-0.5
0.0
0 200 400 600
Time (days)
S
e
t
t
l
e
m
e
n
t

(
m
)
3-D analysis
2-D analysis
(b) S-CLAY1S model results
Fig. 7. Comparison of time settlement curves predicted by 3D and 2D equivalent
plane strain analyses.
Fig. 8. Differences between the results of 3D and 2D equivalent plane strain
analyses.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Time (days)
E
P
P

(
k
N
/
m

)
Geometry mapping (B=0.99m)
Permeability mapping (B=0.57m)
Combined mapping (B=2.00m)
3-D
x = 0.25m
y = -5.00m
Fig. 9. Comparison of EPP predicted by 2D and 3D nite element analyses.
A. Yildiz / Computers and Geotechnics 36 (2009) 10721083 1079
of sample disturbance and sample size effect. It is suggested that k
h
/k
s
can be expressed as (Chai and Miura [50])
k
h
k
s

k
h
k
s
_ _
l
C
f
16
where subscript l represents the value determined in the labora-
tory; and C
f
= hydraulic conductivity ratio between eld and labora-
tory values. The value of C
f
needs to be determined by back-analysis
or eld and laboratory hydraulic conductivity tests. Chai and Miura
[50] reported that the values of C
f
were ranged from 1 to 25 for dif-
ferent clays. It is seen that there is no general agreement in the lit-
erature, and the size of smear zone and its permeability are still not
exactly known. In the following analyses, the size of smear zone and
its permeability were identied from the back-calculations assum-
ing C
f
= 1. Therefore, the ratios of d
s
/d
m
or k
h
/k
s
were iteratively var-
ied to show how well the analysis simulated the eld performance.
Only S-CLAY1S model was used in the back analyses.
Figs. 10 and 11 show the nite element predictions obtained
from 3D modeling, which considers the effect of smear. As seen
in Fig. 10, an increase in the diameter of smear zone causes a de-
crease in the settlement rate of the soft subsoil. The results in
Fig. 10 demonstrate that when the ratio of d
s
/d
w
is greater than 7
(or d
s
/d
m
> 5), there is not much effect on the settlement behavior.
The timevertical displacement relationships for different k
h
/k
s
values predicted by 3D analyses are shown in Fig. 11. The effect
of reduced horizontal permeability in the smear zone on settle-
ment behavior of the embankment is clearly signicant. The rate
of settlement decreases with an increase in the k
h
/k
s
ratio. It is
obvious that the smear effect has major inuence on the settle-
ment behavior. In addition, the k
h
/k
s
ratio was found to affect the
settlement rate more than the d
s
/d
w
ratio.
Vertical displacement versus time as predicted by 3D and 2D
equivalent plane strain analyses is compared for various d
s
/d
w
and k
h
/k
s
ratios and only the results of d
s
/d
w
= 7 and k
h
/k
s
= 20 are
presented in Fig. 12. Again, all matching procedures produce effec-
tively identical settlement responses for each constitutive model
and combined matching results are only presented in Fig. 12. The
maximum differences between 3D and 2D equivalent plane strain
predictions for various k
h
/k
s
ratios are also shown in Table 6,
assuming the ratio of d
s
/d
w
= 7. It can be seen that the rate of con-
solidation in the plane strain analysis is faster than that in 3D
analysis.
Fig. 13 illustrates the calculated differences in the plane strain
analyses with smear effect compared to the 3D unit cell analysis.
The results of combined matching procedure are taken as reference
for the difference calculations. The maximum differences are about
6.7% and 5.9% for MCC and S-CLAY1S, respectively. At the end of
consolidation, the differences are about 0.1% and 2.1% for MCC
and S-CLAY1S, respectively. It is seen that the match is reasonable,
but not perfect. Given differences vary from model to model. In or-
der to improve the match, the permeabilities for the equivalent
plane strain model need to be adjusted further. As the predicted
coefcients of consolidation differ from model to model, it might
be necessary to consider each model separately to improve the
match.
6.2. Full-scale plane strain analyses
The boundaries of the geometry used in the full-scale nite ele-
ment analyses have an extent of 40 m in the horizontal direction
from the symmetry axis and 22.2 m in the vertical direction. The
test embankment was assumed symmetric and only half of the
-2.0
-1.5
-1.0
-0.5
0.0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000
Time (days)
S
e
t
t
l
e
m
e
n
t

(
m
)
1
2
3
5
7
10
d
s
/d
w
ratios
Fig. 10. The effect of d
s
/d
w
on the settlement behavior (with S-CLAY1S model).
-2.0
-1.5
-1.0
-0.5
0.0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000
Time (days)
S
e
t
t
l
e
m
e
n
t

(
m
)
1
2
5
10
20
k
h
/k
s
ratios
Fig. 11. The effect of k
h
/k
s
on the settlement behavior (with S-CLAY1S model).
-1.5
-1.0
-0.5
0.0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000
Time (days)
S
e
t
t
l
e
m
e
n
t

(
m
)
3-D analysis
2-D analysis
(a) MCC model results
-2.0
-1.5
-1.0
-0.5
0.0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000
Time (days)
S
e
t
t
l
e
m
e
n
t

(
m
)
3-D analysis
2-D analysis
(b) S-CLAY1S model results
Fig. 12. Comparison of time-settlement curves predicted by 3D and 2D equivalent
plane strain analyses.
1080 A. Yildiz / Computers and Geotechnics 36 (2009) 10721083
embankment is considered in the nite element analyses. The
plane strain condition and 15-noded triangular elements were
used and all simulations were done as large strain analyses. A nite
element mesh with 953 elements is used to model the subsoil and
the embankment (Fig. 14). Mesh sensitivity studies were done to
conrm that the mesh was dense enough to give accurate results
for all of the constitutive models concerned. Updated mesh analy-
sis taking into account the effects of large deformations was used
in the numerical analyses.
Based on the results given above, a combined matching proce-
dure was adopted to simulate full-scale plane strain analysis of
Haarajoki embankment. The equivalent plane strain width of the
drain (B) was preselected as 0.5 m in the analyses. Based on the
back calculations, the smear effect is taken into consideration by
using d
s
/d
w
= 7 (or d
s
/d
m
= 5) and k
h
/k
s
= 20, within the ranges pro-
posed by several investigators [4852]. For d
s
/d
w
= 7 and k
h
/k
s
= 20,
the k
pl
was calculated as 0.013k
ax
for the full plane strain analysis
of the embankment, by using Eq. (14). The observed settlements
and predicted vertical displacements by three constitutive models
versus time at the surface of the ground underneath the center line
(Fig. 15a) and the crest (Fig. 15b) of Haarajoki test embankment on
Fig. 13. Differences between the results of 3D and equivalent 2D equivalent plane
strain analyses.
Fig. 14. Finite element mesh used for 2D plane strain analyses.
Table 6
Predicted maximum differences for various k
h
/k
s
ratios (d
s
/d
w
= 7).
Constitutive model k
h
/k
s
= 1 (%) k
h
/k
s
= 2 (%) k
h
/k
s
= 5 (%) k
h
/k
s
= 10 (%) k
h
/k
s
= 20 (%)
MCC 6.5 6.2 5.9 5.8 6.0
S-CLAY1S 5.8 5.6 5.7 5.8 6.1
0
200
400
600
800
0 500 1000
Time (days)
S
e
t
t
l
e
m
e
n
t

(
m
m
)
MCC
S-CLAY1
S-CLAY1S
observed
(a)
0
200
400
600
800
0 500 1000
Time (days)
S
e
t
t
l
e
m
e
n
t

(
m
m
)
MCC
S-CLAY1
S-CLAY1S
observed (right)
observed (left)
(b)
Fig. 15. Time settlement curves for 2D full-scale plane strain analysis: (a) under the
centerline; (b) 4 m from centerline (under the crest of the embankment).
A. Yildiz / Computers and Geotechnics 36 (2009) 10721083 1081
PVD-improved soft soil are compared in Fig. 15. The settlements
predicted by the two anisotropic models (S-CLAY1 and S-CLAY1S)
after 3 years of consolidation are in good agreement with the eld
measurements. However, the rate of consolidation in the calcula-
tions is faster than that in measured values. This is due to the
matching effect since the agreement between 3D and equivalent
plane strain analyses is not perfect as mentioned before. Fig. 15
again highlights the role of anisotropy in the predicted soil re-
sponse. However, the calculated time settlement curve predicts
the settlements to slow down, whereas the observed settlements
suggest that the embankment keeps on settling with a constant
rate. This could be due to creep effects, which are not accounted
for in the analysis.
7. Conclusions
This paper investigates the performance of matching proce-
dures developed by Hird et al. [19,21] for 2D plane strain analysis
of vertical drains compared to the results of 3D numerical analyses.
The actual 3D behavior of a vertical drain was converted into
equivalent plane strain model, considering both perfect drain and
the smear effect due to the installation of vertical drains. A full-
scale plane strain nite element analysis of Haarajoki test embank-
ment built on PVD-improved soft soil was carried out and the
results were compared to eld observations. The soft clay was
modeled with three different constitutive models, the isotropic
Modied Cam Clay (MCC) model, the S-CLAY1 model which ac-
counts for plastic anisotropy and its extension, the S-CLAY1S mod-
el that additionally accounts for bonding and destructuration.
The numerical simulations demonstrate that for this particular
boundary value problem, ignoring the effect of anisotropy and mi-
cro-structure leads to notable underprediction of vertical displace-
ments. The isotropic MCC model predicts notably smaller vertical
settlements than the two anisotropic models.
Two dimensional equivalent plane strain simulations show that
the three alternative matching procedures proposed by Hird et al.
[19,21] produce identical results for each constitutive model. Com-
bined matching procedure is the most convenient as it enables
controlling mesh geometry in the nite element analysis. The rate
of consolidation in the equivalent plane strain analyses tended to
be faster than that in the 3D analyses. The difference changes from
model to model, and varied during consolidation from 0.06% to
6.5%, being the largest after a few months of consolidation. How-
ever, the match is found to be satisfactory, but not perfect.
The smear effect must be taken into consideration in the nite
element analyses. The full-scale plane strain analyses showed that
the settlements calculated with two anisotropic models (S-CLAY
and S-CLAY1S) agreed with the eld measurements when
r
s
/r
w
= 7 (ratio of the radius of the smear zone to the radius of
the equivalent drain) and k
h
/k
s
= 20 (ratio of the intact permeability
to the permeability in the smear zone) which agree with the values
proposed in literature. The models seem to be a signicant
improvement compared with the MCC model.
In the future analyses, it would be advisable to consider the 3D
nature of the whole embankment. In addition, the effects of creep
become signicant because the vertical drains speed up the consol-
idation in the vertically drained area. Further investigations should
consider the creep effect, using the time dependent extensions of
the S-CLAY1 model proposed by Leoni et al. [53] and Yin and
Karstunen [54].
Acknowledgements
The work presented was carried out as part of a Marie Curie
Research Training Network Advanced Modelling of Ground
Improvement on Soft Soils (AMGISS) (MRTN-CT-2004-512120)
supported by the European Community through the program Hu-
man Resources and Mobility. In addition, the author was sup-
ported by the Scientic and Technological Research Council of
Turkey (TUBITAK). The author wishes to thank Dr. Minna Karstun-
en, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK, for her valuable com-
ments and suggestions.
References
[1] Roscoe KH, Burland JB. On the generalized stressstrain behaviour of wet clay.
Engineering plasticity. Cambridge University Press; 1968. p. 553609.
[2] Rouainia M, Muir Wood D. A kinematic hardening model for natural clays with
loss of structure. Gotechnique 2000;50(2):15364.
[3] Kavvadas M, Amorosi A. A constitutive model for structured soils.
Gotechnique 2000;50(3):26374.
[4] Liu MD, Carter JP. A structured Cam Clay model. Can Geotech J
2002;41:131332.
[5] Nova R, Castellanza R, Tamagnini C. A constitutive model for bonded
geomaterials subject to mechanical and/or chemical degradation. Int J Num
Anal Meth Geomech 2003;27(9):70532.
[6] Dafalias YF, Manzari MT, Papadimitriou AG. SANICLAY: simple anisotropic clay
plasticity model. Int J Numer Anal Meth Geomech 2006;30:123157.
[7] Wheeler SJ, Ntnen A, Karstunen M, Lojander M. An anisotropic elasto plastic
model for soft clays. Can Geotech J 2003;40:40318.
[8] Koskinen M, Karstunen M, Wheeler SJ. Modeling destructuration and
anisotropy of a natural soft clay. In: Proceedings of the 5th European
conference on numerical methods in geotechnical engineering (NUMGE),
Paris; 2002. p. 1120.
[9] Gens A, Nova R. Conceptual bases for a constitutive model for bonded soils and
weak rocks. In: Proceedings of the international symposium on hard soils
soft rocks, Athens; 1993. p. 48594.
[10] Koskinen M, Zentar R, Karstunen M. Anisotropy of reconstituted POKO clay. In:
Proceedings of the 8th international symposium on numerical models in
geomechanics (NUMOG), Rome; 2002. p. 99105.
[11] Karstunen M, Koskinen M. Anisotropy and destructuration of Murro clay. In:
Jardine RJ et al., editors. Advances in geotechnical engineering the Skempton
conference, vol. 1. London: Thomas Telford; 2004. p. 47687.
[12] Ntnen A, Wheeler S, Karstunen M, Lojander M. Experimental investigation
of an anisotropic hardening model. In: Proceedings of the 2nd international
symposium on prefailure deformation characteristics of geomaterials, Turin,
Balkema; 1999. p. 5418.
[13] Koskinen M, Karstunen M. The effect of structure on the compressibility of
Finnish clays. Proc XIV Nordic Geotech Meet 2004;1:1122.
[14] Zentar R, Karstunen M, Wheeler SJ. Inuence of anisotropy and destructuration
on undrained shearing of natural clays. In: Proceedings of the 5th European
conference on numerical methods in geotechnical engineering (NUMGE),
Paris; 2002. p. 216.
[15] Li AL, Rowe RK. Combined effects of reinforcement and prefabricated vertical
drains on embankment performance. Can Geotech J 2001;38:126682.
[16] Borges JL. Three-dimensional analysis of embankments on soft soils
incorporating vertical drains by nite element method. Comp Geotech
2004;31:66576.
[17] Chai JC, Miura N, Sakajo S, Bergado DT. Behavior of vertical drain improved
subsoil under embankment loading. Soils Found 1995;35(4):4961.
[18] Chai JC, Shen SL, Miura N, Bergado DT. Simple method of modeling pvd-
improved subsoil. ASCE J Geotech Geoenv Eng 2001;127(11):96572.
[19] Hird CC, Pyrah IC, Russell D. Finite element modeling of vertical drains beneath
embankments on soft ground. Gotechnique 1992:499511.
[20] Indraratna B, Redana IW. Plane strain modeling of smear effects associated
with vertical drains. J Geotech Geoenv Eng 1997;123(5):4748.
[21] Hird CC, Pyrah IC, Russell D, Cinicioglu F. Modelling the effect of vertical drains
in two-dimensional nite element analyses of embankments on soft ground.
Can Geotech J 1995;32:795807.
[22] Graham J, Noonan ML, Lew KV. Yield states and stressstrain relations in
natural plastic clay. Can Geotech J 1983;20:50216.
[23] Korhonen KH, Lojander M. Yielding of Perno clay. In: Proceedings of the 2nd
international conference on constitutive laws for engineering materials,
Arizona, vol. 2; 1987. p. 124955.
[24] Finnish National Road Administration. Competition to calculate settlements at
the Haarajoki test embankment. Competition programme, Competition
materials, FinnRA, Finland: 1997.
[25] Ntnen A, Puumalainen N, Saarelainen K, Aalto A, Lojander M, Vepslinen P.
Estimation of settlement of Haarajoki test embankment. In: Proceedings of 6th
nnish mechanical days, Oulu, Finland; September 5-6, 1997. p. 295310.
[26] Aalto A. The calculations on Haarajoki test embankment with the nite
element program Plaxis 6.1. In: Proceedings of the 4th European conference on
numerical methods in geotechnical engineering (NUMGE), Udine; 1416
October, 1998.
[27] Ntnen A, Vepslinen P, Lojander, M. Finite element calculations on
Haarajoki test embankment. In: Proceedings of the 4th European conference
on numerical metchods in geotechnical engineering NUMGE98, Udine; 1998.
p. 15160.
1082 A. Yildiz / Computers and Geotechnics 36 (2009) 10721083
[28] Cundy M, Neher H. Numerical analysis of a test embankment on soft ground
using an anisotropic model with destructuration. In: International workshop
on geotechnics of soft soils-theory and practice, Noordwijkerhout,
Netherlands; 1719 September, 2003. p. 26570.
[29] Mayne PW, Kulhawy FH. K
0
OCR relationship in soil. J Geotech Eng
1982;18(6):85172.
[30] Brinkgreve RBJ, Swolfs WM. PLAXIS, nite element code for soil and rock
analyses, 3D foundation V2. Rotterdam: Balkema; 2007.
[31] Wiltafsky C. S-CLAY1S. User dened soil model for plaxis
documentation. University of Glasgow; 2003.
[32] Hansbo S. Consolidation of clay by band-shaped vertical drains. Ground Eng
1979;12(5):1625.
[33] Atkinson MS, Eldred PJL. Consolidation of soil using vertical drains.
Geotechnique 1981;31(1):,3343.
[34] Rixner JJ, Kramer SR, Smith AD. Prefabricated vertical drains, vol. II, Summary
of research effort. Federal highway administration research, report no. FHWA/
RD-86/169, Washington, DC; 1986.
[35] Long RP, Covo A. Equivalent diameter of vertical drains with an oblong cross
section. J Geotech Eng Div ASCE 1994;120(9):162530.
[36] Barron RA. Consolidation of ne-grained soils by drain wells. Trans Am Soc
Civil Eng 1948;113:71843.
[37] Hansbo S. Consolidation of ne-grained soils by prefabricated drains. In:
Proceedings of the 10th international conference on soil mechanics and
foundation engineering, Stockholm, vol. 3; 1981. p. 67782.
[38] Onoue A. Consolidation by vertical drains taking well resistance and smear
into consideration. Soils Found 1988;28(4):16574.
[39] Zeng GX, Xie KH. New development of vertical drain theories. In: Proceedings
of the 12th ICSMFE, Rio de Janeiro, vol. 2; 1989. p. 14358.
[40] Brinkgreve RBJ. PLAXIS, nite element code for soil and rock analyses, 2D
version 8. Rotterdam: Balkema; 2002.
[41] Taylor DW. Fundamentals of soil mechanics. New York: Wiley; 1948.
[42] Tavenas F, Jean P, Leblond P, Leroueil S. The permeability of natural clays, Part
II: permeability characteristics. Can Geotech J 1983;20(4):64560.
[43] Indraratna B, Balasubramaniam AS, Ratnayake P. Performance of embankment
stabilized with vertical drains on soft clay. ASCE J Geotech Eng
1994;120(2):25773.
[44] Hansbo S. Aspects of vertical drain design: Darcian or non-Darcian ow.
Gotechnique 1997;47:98392.
[45] Zhou W, Hong HP, Shang JQ. Probabilistic design method of prefabricated
vertical drains for soil improvement. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng
1999;125(8):65964.
[46] Jamiolkowski M, Lancellotta R. Consolidation by vertical drains: uncertainties
involved in prediction of settlement rates. In: Proceedings of the 10th
international conference on soil mechanics and foundation engineering, vol.
4; 1981. p. 5935.
[47] Hansbo S. Design aspects of vertical drains and lime column installation. In:
Proceedings of 9th Southeast Asian geotechnical conference, vol. 2(8); 1987. p.
112.
[48] Bergado DT, Mukherjee K, Alfaro MC, Balasubramaniam AS. Prediction of
vertical-band-drain performance by the nite-element method. Geotextiles
Geomembranes 1993;12:56786.
[49] Indraratna B, Redana IW. Laboratory determination of smear zone due to
vertical drain installation. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 1998;124:1804.
[50] Chai JC, Miura N. Investigation of factors affecting vertical drain behavior. ASCE
J Geotech Geoenv Eng 1999;125(3):21626.
[51] Bo MW, Bawajee R, Chu J, Choa V. Investigation of smear zone around vertical
drain. In: Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on ground
improvement techniques, Singapore; 2000. p. 10914.
[52] Xiao DP. Consolidation of soft clay using vertical drains. Ph.D. Thesis, Nanyang
Technological University, Singapore; 2001.
[53] Leoni M, Karstunen M, Vermeer PA. Anisotropic creep model for soft soil.
Gotechnique 2008;58(3):21526.
[54] Yin ZY, Karstunen M. Inuence of anisotropy, destructuration and viscosity on
the behaviour of an embankment on soft clay. In: 12th international
conference of international association for computer methods and advances
in geomechanics (IACMAG), India; 2008.
A. Yildiz / Computers and Geotechnics 36 (2009) 10721083 1083