FOUNDATION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN

Module 1 (Lecture 2) GEOTECHNICAL PROPERTIES OF SOIL AND OF REINFORCED SOIL Topics 1.1 SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEMS 1.2 AASHTO System
Unified System Examples and Solutions

1.3 HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY OF SOIL 1.4 STEADY-STATE SEEPAGE 1.5 FILTER DESIGN CRITERIA 1.6 EFFECTIVE STRESS CONCEPT

FOUNDATION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEMS Soil classification systems divide soils into groups and subgroups based on common engineering properties such as grain-size distribution, liquid limit, and plastic limit. The two major classification systems presently in use are (1) the AASHTO (American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials) Systems and (2) the Unified Soil Classification System (also ASTM), the AASHTO classification system is used mainly for classification of highway subgrades. It is not used in foundation construction. AASHTO System The AASHTO Soil Classification System was originally proposed by the Highway Research Boards Committee on Classification of Materials for Subgrades and Granular Type Roads (1945). According to the present form of this system, soils can be classified according to eight major groups, A-1 through A-8, based on their grainsize distribution, liquid limit, and plasticity indices. Soils listed in groups A-1, A-2, and A-3 are coarse-grained materials, and those in groups A-4, A-5, A-6, and A-7 are fine-grained materials. Peat, muck, and other highly organic soils are classified under A-8. They are identified by visual inspection. The AASHTO classification system (for soils A-1 through A-7) is presented in table 8. Note that group A-7 includes two types of soil. For the A-7-5 type, the plasticity index of the soil is less than or equal to the liquid limit minus 30. For the A-7-6 type, the plasticity index is greater than the liquid limit minus 30. For qualitative evaluation of the desirability of a soil as a highway subgrade material, a number referred to as the group index has also been developed. The higher the value of the group index for a given soil, the weaker will be the soils performance as a subgrade. A group index of 20 or more indicates a very poor subgrade material. The formula for group index, , is = (200 35)[0.2 + 0.005( 40)] + 0.01(200 15)( 10) [1.23] Where 200 = percent passing no 200 sieve, expressed as a whole number = liquid limit = plasticity index

FOUNDATION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN Table 8 AASHTO Soil Classification System General classification Granular materials (35% or less of total samples passing no. 200 sieve) A-1 Group classification Sieve analysis (%) passing) No. 10 sieve No. 40 sieve No. 200 sieve For fraction passing No. 40 sieve Liquid limit (LL) Plasticity (PI) index 6 max Nonplastic 40 max 10 max 41 min 10 max 40 max 11 min 50 max 30 max 15 max 50 max 25 max 51 max 10 max 35 max 35 max 35 max A-1-a A-1-b A-3 A-2-4 A-2 A-2-5 A-2-6

Usual type material

of Stone fragments, Fine sand gravel, and sand

Silty or clayey gravel and sand Excellent to good

Subgrade rating

General classification Group classification

Silt-clay materials (More than 35% of total sample passing no. 200 sieve) A-4 A-5 A-6 A-7 A-7-5a A-7b

FOUNDATION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN

Sieve analysis (% passing) No. 10 sieve No. 40 sieve No. 200 sieve For fraction passing No. 40 sieve Liquid limit (LL) Plasticity (PI) 40 max 41 min 10 max 40 max 11 min 41 min 11 min Mostly clayey soils 36 min 36 min 36 min 36 min

index 10 max

Usual types of Mostly silty soils material Subgrade rating If PILL-30, it is A-7-5.
a

Fair to poor

If PI>LL-30, it is A-7-6.
b

When calculating the group index for a soil belonging to groups A-2-6 or A-2-7, us only the partial group index equation relating to the plasticity index: = 0.01(200 15)( 10) [1.24]

The group index is rounded to the nearest whole number and written next to the soil group in parentheses; for example, 4 (5) | Soil group Group index

FOUNDATION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN Unified System The Unified Soil Classification System was originally proposed by A. Casagrande in 1942 and was later revised and adopted by the United States Bureau of Reclamation and the Corps of Engineers. This system is presently used in practically all geotechnical work. In the Unified System, the following symbols are used for identification. Symbol

Descripti Grav on el

San d

Sil Cla t y

Organ ic silts and clay

Peat and highl y organ ic soils

High Low Well plastici plastici grad ty ty ed

Poorl y grad ed

The plasticity chart (figure 1.7) and table 9 shows the procedure for determining the group symbols for various types of soil. When classifying a soil be sure to provide the group name that generally describes the soil, along with the group symbol. Tables 10, 11 and 12, respectively, give the criteria for obtaining the group names for coarsegrained soil, inorganic fine-grained soil, and organic fine-grained soil. These tables are based on ASTM Designation D-2487. Table 9 Group Symbol for Soil According to the Unified Classification System [Based on Material Passing 3-in. (75-mm) Sieve] Major division Coarse-grained soil Criteria 200 < 5, 4, 1 3 Group symbol GW

200 > 50

200 < 5, < 4, and /or not between 1 and 3

GP

Gravelly soil 4 > 0.5200

200 > 12, < 4, or GM Atterberg limits plot be low A line (figure 1.7) 200 > 12, < 7, and GC Atterberg limits plot on or above A line (figure 1.7)

FOUNDATION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN

GC-GM a 200 > 12, < 50, 4 7 and Atterberg limits plot on or above A line

5 200 12; meets the GW-GM a gradation criteria of GW and the plasticity criteria of GM 5 200 12; meets the GW-GC a gradation criteria of GW and the plasticity criteria of GC 5 200 12; meets the GP-GC a gradation criteria of GP and the plasticity criteria of GM 5 200 12; meets the GP-GC a gradation criteria of GP and the plasticity criteria of GC Sandy soil 200 < 5, 6, 1 3 SW

4 0.5200

200 < 5, < 6, and/or SP not between 1 and 3

200 > 12, > 4, or SM Atterberg limits plot below A line (figure 1.7) 200 > 12, > 7, and SC Atterberg limits plot on or above A line (figure 1.7) SC-SM a 200 > 12, > 50, 4 7 And Atterberg limits plot on or above A line (figure 1.7) 5 200 12; meets the SW-SM a gradation criteria of SW and the plasticity criteria of SM 5 200 12; meets the SW-SC a gradation criteria of SW and

FOUNDATION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN the plasticity criteria of SC 5 200 12; meets the SP-SM a gradation criteria of SP and the plasticity criteria of SM 5 200 12; meets the SP-SC a gradation criteria of SP and the plasticity criteria of SC Fine-grained 200 50 soil (inorganic), < 4, or Atterberg limits ML plot below A line (figure 1.7) > 7 or Atterberg limits CL plot on or above A line (figure 1.7)

Silty and clayey soil < 50

4 > 7, and Atterberg CL-ML a limits plot above A line (figure 1.7) Silty and clayey soil 50 Atterberg limits plot on or MH above A line (figure 1.7) Atterberg limits plot on or CH above A line (figure 1.7) Fine-grained soil (organic) Organic silt and clay) < 50 Organic silt and clay 50 not oven dry < 0.75 oven dry not oven dry < 0.75 oven dry OL

OH

Note: 200 = percent finer than no. 200 sieve; R 200 = percent retained on no. 200 sieve; R 4 = perent retained on no. 4 sieve; Cu = uniformity coefficient; Cz = coefficient of gradation; = liquid limit; = plasticity index Atterberg limits based on minus no. 40 fraction Borderline case; dual classification

FOUNDATION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN Example 4 Classify the following soil by the AASHTO classification system: Percent passing no. 4 sieve = 82 Percent passing no. 10 sieve = 71 Percent passing no. 40 sieve = 64 Percent passing no. 200 sieve = 41 Liquid limit = 31 Plasticity index = 12 Solution Refer to table 8. More than 35% passes through a no. 200 sieve, so it is a silt-clay material. It could be A-4, A-5, A-6, or A-7. Because LL = 31 (that is, less than 40) and PI = 12 (that is, greater than 11) this soil falls in group A-6. From equation (23), = (200 35)[0.02 + 0.005( 40)] + 0.01(200 15)( 10) = (41 35)[0.02 + 0.005(31 40)] + 0.01(41 15)(12 10) = 0.37 0 Thus the soil is A-6(0). Example 5 Classify the following soil by the AASHTO classification system. Percent passing no. 4 sieve = 92 Percent passing no. 10 sieve = 87 Percent passing no. 40 sieve = 65 Percent passing no. 200 sieve = 30 Liquid limit = 22 Plasticity index = 8

FOUNDATION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN Solution Table 8 shows that it is granular material because less than 35% is passing a no. 200 sieve. With = 22 (that is, less than 40) and = 8 (that is, less than 10), the soil alls in group A-2-4. From equation (24), = 0.01(200 15)( 10) = 0.01(30 15)(8 10) = 0.3 0 The soil is A-2-4(0).

Table 10 Group Names for Coarse-Grained Soils (Based on ASTM D-2487) Criteria Group symbol GW Gravel fraction (%) Sand fraction (%) < 15 15 GP < 15 15 GM < 15 15 GC < 15 15 GC-GM < 15 15 GW-GM < 15 15 Group name Well-graded gravel Well-graded gravel with sand Poorly gravel graded

Poorly graded gravel with sand Silty gravel Silty gravel with sand Clayey gravel Clayey gravel with sand Silty clayey gravel Silty clayey gravel with sand Well-graded gravel with silt Well-graded gravel with silt and sand

FOUNDATION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN

GW-GC

< 15 15

Well-graded gravel with clay Well-graded gravel with clay and sand Poorly graded gravel with silt Poorly graded gravel with silt and sand Poorly graded gravel with clay Poorly graded gravel with clay and sand Well graded sand Well-graded with gravel sand

GP-GM

< 15 15

GP-GC

< 15 15

SW

< 15 15

SP

< 15 15

Poorly graded sand Poorly graded sand with gravel Silty sand Silty sand gravel Clayey sand Clayey sand with gravel Silty clayey sand Silty clayey sand with gravel Well-graded with silt sand with

SM

< 15 15

SC

< 15 15

SM-SC

< 15 15

SW-SM

< 15

FOUNDATION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN

15 SW-SC < 15 15 SP-SM < 15 15 SP-SC < 15 15

Well-graded sand with silt and gravel Well-graded with clay sand

Well-graded sand with lay and gravel Poorly graded sand with silt Poorly graded sand with silt and gravel Poorly graded sand with clay Poorly graded sand with clay and gravel

Note: sand fraction = percent of soil passing no. 4 sieve but retained on no. 200 sieve= 200 4 ; gravel fraction = percent of soil passing 3-in. sieve but retained on no. 4 sieve = 4 Table 11 Group Names for Inorganic Fine-Grained Soils (Based on ASTM D2487) Criteria Group symbol CL 200 < 15 15 to 29 1 <1 30 1 1 < 15 15
Gravel fraction Sand fraction

Gravel fraction

Sand fraction

Group name Lean clay Lean clay with sand Lean clay with gravel Sandy lean clay Sandy lean clay with

FOUNDATION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN gravel <1 <1 < 15 15 Gravelly lean clay Gravelly lean clay with sand Silt 1 <1 30 1 1 <1 <1 CL-ML < 15 15 to 29 1 <1 30 1 1 <1 <1 < 15 15 < 15 15 < 15 15 < 15 15 Silt sand with

ML

< 15 15 to 29

Silt with gravel Sandy silt Sandy silt with gravel Gravelly silt Gravelly silt with sand Silty clay Silty clay with sand Silty clay with gravel Sandy silty clay Sandy silty clay with gravel Gravelly silty clay Gravelly silty clay with sand

FOUNDATION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN

CH

< 15 15 to 29 1 <1 30 1 1 <1 <1 < 15 15 < 15 15

Fat clay Fat clay with sand Fat clay with gravel Sandy clay fat

Sandy fat clay with gravel Gravelly fat clay Gravelly fat clay with sand Elastic silt

MH

< 15 15 to 29 1 <1 30 1 1 <1 <1 < 15 15 < 15 15

Elastic silt with sand Elastic silt with gravel Sandy elastic silt Sandy elastic silt with gravel Gravelly elastic silt Gravelly elastic silt with sand

Note: 200 =percent of soil retained on o. 200 sieve; sand fraction = percent of soil passing no. 4 sieve but retained on no. 200 sieve = 200 4 ; gravel fraction = percent of soil passing 3-in. sieve but retained on no. sieve = 4 .

FOUNDATION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN Table 12 Group Names for Organic Fine-Grained Soils (Based on ASTM D2487) Criteria Group symbol Plasticity 200
Sand fraction

Gravel fraction

Gravel fraction

Sand fraction

Group name

Organic clay Organic clay with sand Organic clay with gravel Sandy organic clay Gravelly organic clay

OL

<15 4, and Atterberg 15 to 29 limits on or above A line 30

1 <1 1 1 <1 < 15 15

< 15

<1

15

Gravelly organic clay with sand Organic silt Organic silt with sand

<15 4, and Atterberg 15 to 29 limits plot below A line 30

1 <1 1 1 <1 < 15 15

Organic silt with gravel Sandy organic silt Sandy organic silt with gravel Gravelly organic silt Gravelly

< 15

<1

15

FOUNDATION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN organic silt with sand

OH

Atterberg <15 limits plot on or 15 to 29 above A line

1 <1 1 1 <1 < 15 15

Organic clay Organic clay with sand Organic clay with gravel Sandy organic clay

30

< 15

<1

15

Sandy organic clay with gravel Gravelly organic clay Gravelly organic clay with gravel

Atterberg <15 limits plot below A 15 to 29 line

1 <1 1 1 <1 < 15 15

Organic silt Organic silt with sand Organic silt with gravel Sandy organic silt Sandy organic silt with gravel Gravelly

30

< 15

<1

15

FOUNDATION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN organic silt Gravelly organic silt with sand Note: 200 = percent of soil retained on no. 200 sieve; sand fraction = percent of soil passing no. 4 sieve but retained on o. 200 sieve 200 4 ; gravel fraction = percent of soil passing 3-in. sieve but retained on bo. 4 sieve = 4 Example 6 Classify the soil described in example 5 according to the Unified Soil Classification System. Solution For 200 = 30

200 = 100 200 = 100 30 = 70

As 200 > 50, it is a coarse-grained soil. = 100 92 = 8

4 = 100 percent passing no. 4 sieve As 4 = 8 < 0.5200 = 35, it is a sandy soil. Now, refer to table 9. Because 200 is greater than 12, the group symbol would be SM or SC. As the PI is greater than 7 and the Atterberg limits plot above the A line in figure 1.7 it is SC. For the group name, refer to table 10. The gravel fraction is less than 15%, so the group name is clayey sand. HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY OF SOIL The soil spaces or pores between soil grains allow water to flow through them. In soil mechanics and foundation, engineering, you must know how much water is flowing through a soil in unit time. This knowledge is required to design earth dams, determine the quantity of seepage under hydraulic structures, and dewater before and during the construction of foundations. Darcy (1856) proposed the following equation (figure 1.8) for calculating the velocity of flow of water through a soil.

FOUNDATION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN

Figure 1.7 Plasticity chart

Figure 1.8 Definition of Darcys law

Where

[1.25]

= Darcy velocity (unit: cm/sec)

= hydraulic conductivity of soil (unit: cm/sec)

FOUNDATION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN = hydraulic gradient =

The hydraulic gradient, , is defined as Where = piezometric head difference between the sections at and = distance between the sections at and (Note: Sections AA and BB are perpendicular to the direction of flow).

[1.26]

Darcys law [equation (25)] is valid for a wide range of soil types. However, materials like clean gravel and open-graded rockfills, Darcys law breaks because of the turbulent nature of flow through them. The value of the hydraulic conductivity of soils varies greatly. In the laboratory it can be determined by means of constant head or falling head permeability testing. The constant head test is more suitable for granular soils. Table 13, provides the general range for the values of k for various soils. In granular the value primarily depends on the void ratio. In the past, several equations have been proposed to relate the value of k with the void ratio in the granular soil:
1 2 1 2 1 2

= 2 2
2

1
2 1 1+ 1 2 2 1+ 2 3 1 1+ 1 3 2 1+ 2

[1.27]

= =

[1.28]

[1.29]

where 1 and 2 are the hydraulic conductivities of a given soil at void ratios 1 at 2 , respectively Hazen (1930) proposed an equation for the hydraulic conductivity of fairly us from sand as
2 = 10

[1.30]

FOUNDATION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN Table 13 Range of the Hydraulic Conductivity for Various Soils Type of soil Medium to coarse gravel Coarse to fine sand Fine sand, silty sand Silt, clayey silt, silty clay Clays where k is in mm/sec = a constant that varies between 10 and 15 10 = effective soil size, in mm log = log 0 Where = hydraulic conductivity at a void ratio = conductivity change index 0.50
0

Hydraulic conductivity, (cm/sec) Greater than 101 101 to 103 103 to 105 104 to 106 107 or less

For clayey soils in the field, a practical relationship for estimating the hydraulic conductivity (Tavenas et al., 1983) is [1.31]

0 = hydraulic conductivity at a void ratio 0 For clayey soils, the hydraulic conductivity for flow in the vertical and horizontal directions may vary substantially. The hydraulic conductivity for flow in the vertical direction ( ) for in situ soils can be estimated from figure 1.9. For marine and other massive clay deposits

Where

< 1.5

[1.32]

= hydraulic conductivity for flow in the horizontal direction For varved clays, the ratio of / may exceed 10.

FOUNDATION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN

Figure 1.9 Variaton of in situ for clay soils (after Tavenas et al. 1983) Example 7 For a fine sand, the following are given: Dry unit weight = 15.1 kN/m3 = 2.67 Hydraulic conductivity = 0.14 cm/sec Solution = =
1+

If the sand is compacted to a dry unit weight of 16.3 kN/m3 , estimate its hydraulic conductivity. Use equation (29).

For = 15.1 kN/m3 ,

1=

(2.67)(9.81) 15.1

1 = 0.735

FOUNDATION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN For = 16.3 kN/m3 , =

1 2 2 (2.67)(9.81) 16.3

From equation (29), =

3 1 1+ 1 3 2 1+ 2

1 = 0.607

0.14

2 = 0.085 cm/sec

= 1+0.735 (0.607)3

(0.735)3

1+0.607

STEADY-STATE SEEPAGE For most cases of seepage under hydraulic structures, the flow path changes direction and is not uniform over the entire area. In such cases, one of the ways determining the rate of seepage is by a graphical construction referred to as net. The flow net is based on Laplaces theory of continuity. According to this those for a steady flow condition, the flow at any point A (figure 1.10) can be represent by the equation.

Figure 1.10 Steady-state seepage

FOUNDATION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN 2 + 2 + 2 = 0 Where , , = hydraulic conductivity of the soil in the , , and , direction spectively For a two-dimensional flow condition as shown in figure 1.10.
2 2 2 2 2

= Hydraulic head at point A (that is, the head of water the piezometer placed at A would show with the downstream level as datum as shown in figure 1.10. =0

So equation (33) takes the form 2 + 2 = 0 [1.34] If the soil is isotropic with respect to hydraulic conductivity, = = , and
2 2 2 2 2

Equation (35), which is referred to as Laplaces equation and is valid for confined flow, represents two orthogonal sets of curves that are known as flow lines and equipotential lines. A flow net is a combination of numerous equipotential lines and flow lines. A flow line is a path that a water particle would follow in travelling from the upstream side to the downstream side. An equipotential line is a line along which water in piezometers would rise to the same elevation (see figure 1.10). In drawing a flow net, you need to establish the boundary conditions. For example, in figure 1.10 the ground surfaces on the upstream (OO) and downstream (DD) sides are equipotential lines. The base of the dam below the ground surface, OBCD, is a flow line. The top of the rock surface, EF, is also a flow line. Once the boundary conditions are established, a number of flow lines and equipotential lines are drawn by trial and error so that all the flow elements in the net have the same length the width ratio (L/B). In most cases, the L/B ratio is kept as 1-that is, the flow elements are drawn as curvilinear squares. This method is illustrated by the flow net shown in figure 1.11. Note that all flow lines must intersect all equipotential lines at right angles. Once the flow net is drawn, the seepage in unit time per unit length of the structure can be calculated as

+ 2 = 0

[1.35]

FOUNDATION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN = max

f

[1.36]

Figure 1.11 flow net Where = number of flow channels = number of drops = width to length ratio of the flow element in the flow net (/)

The space between two consecutive flow lines is defined as a flow channel, and the space between two consecutive equipotential lines is called a drop. In figure 1.11 = 1, = 7, and = 1. When square elements are drawn in a flow net, = max
d f

max = difference in water level between the upstream and downstream side

[1.37]

FILTER DESIGN CRITERIA In the design of earth structures the engineer often encounters problems cause by the flow of water, such as soil erosion, which may result in structural instability. Erosion is generally prevented by building soil zones that are referred to as filters (see figure 1.12). Two main factors influence the choice of filter materials: The grained size

FOUNDATION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN distribution of the filter materials should be such that (a) the soil to be protected is not washed into the filter and (b) excessive hydrostatic pressure head is not created in the soil that has a lower coefficient of permeability.

Figure 1.12 Filter design The preceding conditions can be satisfied if the following requirements are met (Terzaghi and Peck, 1967):
85 ( ) 15 ( ) 15 ( ) 15 ( )

<5 >4

[to satisfy condition (a)]

[1.38] [1.39]

In these relations, the subscripts F and B refer to the filter and the base material (that is, the soil to be protected). Also 15 and 85 refer to the diameters through which 15% and 85% of the soil (filter or base, as the case may be) will pass. The U. S. Department of the Navy (1971) provides some additional requirements for filter design to satisfy condition (a):
50 ( ) 15 ( ) 15 ( ) 50 ( )

[to satisfy condition (b)]

< 25 < 20

[1.40] [1.41]

Currently, geotextiles are also used as filter materials.

FOUNDATION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN EFFECTIVE STRESS CONCEPT Consider the vertical stress at a point A located at a depth 1 + 2 below the grout surface, as shown in figure 1.13a. The total vertical stress, , at is

Figure 1.13 Effective stress calculations = 1 + 2 sat [1.42]

where and sat are unit weights of soil above and below the water table, respectively.

The total stress is carried partially by the pore water in the void spaces at partially by the soil solids at their points of contact. For example, consider a wave plane AB drawn through point A (see figure 1.13a) that passes through the point of contact of soil grains. The plan of this section is shown in figure 1.13b. The small dots in figure 1.13b represent the areas in which there is solid-to-solid contact. If the sum of these areas equal A, the area filled by water equals XY-A. The force carried by the pore water over the area shown in figure 1.13b then is

FOUNDATION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN = ( ") [1.43] [1.44]

where = pore water pressure = 2

Now let 1 , 2 , be the forces at the contact points of the soil solids as shown in figure 1.13a. The sum of the vertical components of these forces over a horizontal area XY is = 1( ) + 2( ) + [1.45] where 1( ) + 2( ) , are vertical components of forces 1 , 2 , , respectibvely Based on the principles of statics, () = + Or () = ( ) + So = (1 ) + Where [1.46]

= / = Fraction of the unit cross-sectional area occupied by solid-to-solid contact

= /( ) = Vertical component of forces at solid-to-solid contact points over a unit cross-sectional area

The term in equation (46) is generally referred to as the vertical effective stress. Also, the quantity a in equation (46) is very small. Thus = + [1.47] Note that the effective stress is a derived quantity. Also, because the effective stress is related to the contact between the soil solids, changes in effective stress will induce volume changes. It is also responsible for producing frictional resistance in soils and rocks. For dry soils, = 0; hence, = . For the problem under consideration in figure = 2 ( = unit weight of water). Thus the effective stress at point A is = = (1 + 2 sat ) 2 = 1 + 2 (sat ) = 1 + 2 1.13a,

[1.48]

FOUNDATION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN Where = effective or the submerged unit weight of soil = sat sat = So From equation (15),
+ 1+

= sat =

+ 1+

( 1) 1+

[1.49]

For the problem in figure 1.13a and 1.13b, there was no seepage of water in soil. Figure 1.13c shows a simple condition in a soil profile where there is upward seepage. For this case, at point A = 1 + 2 sat

= (1 + 2 + )

Thus from equation (47), = (1 + 2 sat ) (1 + 2 + ) = 2 (sat ) = 2 Or = 2 = 2 ( )

2

[1.50]

Note in equation (50) that /2 is the hydraulic gradient, . If the hydraulic gradient very high, so that becomes zero, the effective stress will become zero, other words, there is no contact stress between the soil particles, and the structure will break up. This situation is referred to as the quick condition or failure by heave. So, for heave, = = =

1 1+

[1.51]

For most sandy soils, ranges from 0.9 to 1.1, with an average of about 1.

FOUNDATION ANALYSIS AND DESIGN Example 8 For the soil profile in figure 1.14, determine the total vertical stress, pore water pressure, and effective vertical stress at A, B and C.

Figure 1.14 Solution The following table can now be prepared. Point (kN/m2 ) 0 0 (kN/m2 = (kN /m2 0 58

A B

(4)( ) = (4)(14.5) 0 = 58 58 + (sat )(5) = 58 + (17.2)(5) = 144

(5)( ) = (5)(9.81) = 49.05

94.95