You are on page 1of 30

# CE5101 Consolidation and Seepage

OCT 2010

## CE 5101 Lecture 8 Radial

Consolidation and PVD

October 2011
Prof Harry Tan

Outline
Carillo Theory Combined vertical and
PVD Design
FEM Model of PVD and Surcharge
Some Cases

## CE5101 Consolidation and Seepage

Lecture 8 PVD and Surcharge

OCT 2010

## Radial Consolidation - Barrons Theory (1948)

3 - D Governing Equation in radial coords :
2u 1 u
u
2u
c v 2
c h 2
t
r r
z
r
where
ch

kh
kv
, cv
m v w
m v w

2u 1 u
u

c h 2
t
r r
r
Boundary Conditions :
1. u u 0 at t 0
2. u(rw ) 0 for t 0
3.

u(re )
0 (impervious due to symmetry)
r

u u
4U12 e 4 n Th
Ur 1 r ; r 2 2
u 0 u0
(n 1 ) n 2U 02 n U12
2 2

where : n

de
ct
and Th h2 ; U 0 and U1 are Bessel Functions
dw
de
Note :
Free strain means
non - uniform
settlement as soil
closest to drain
settle fastest
U r is a function
of n and Th only

## CE5101 Consolidation and Seepage

Lecture 8 PVD and Surcharge

OCT 2010

## The average degree of radial consolidation Ucoincides

with
r
the local degree of consolidation Ur at (D-d) point of soil
cylinder, best place for piezometer to monitor progress of
consolidation
Like Ur

## Solution for Equal Strain Condition (Ideal Drain) :

Ur 1 e

8Th
f (n)

8T

where : f (n)

h
ur
e f (n)
u0

n2
3n 2 1
ln(
n
)

n2 1
4n 2

Comparison
p
show very small
differences
between freestrain and equalstrain, esp for
n>10
For n=5,
significant
difference in
first 50% of
consolidation

## CE5101 Consolidation and Seepage

Lecture 8 PVD and Surcharge

OCT 2010

## What is size of Influence Diameter de or D

Square spacing :
s2

4
D 1.13s

Traingular spacing :

D 2
4

D 1.05s

8Th
ct
U r 1 exp
; Th h 2

D
n2
3n 2 1
where : 2 ln(n)
n 1
4n 2

ct
8Th
U rz 1 exp
; Th h 2
D
s
where : s ln

k
n kc
3

ln(m) z 2 L z c
m k 'c
qw
4

## CE5101 Consolidation and Seepage

Lecture 8 PVD and Surcharge

OCT 2010

## CE5101 Consolidation and Seepage

Lecture 8 PVD and Surcharge

OCT 2010

## Combined Flow - Carillos Theorem (1942)

If u1 f1 r , t is a solution to

2u 1 u
u

ch 2
t
r r
r

u
2u
cv 2
t
z
then u1u 2 is a solutionof the combined flow problem
and u 2 f 2 z , t is a solution to

u
t
2 u1u 2 1 u1u 2
u1u 2
2 u1u 2
cv
ch

r 2
t
z 2
r r

u 2 u1 u1 u 2
2 u 2
2 u1 1 u1
u1cv

u 2 ch

2
r r
t
t
z 2
r
This means that :
Pr oof : Substitute u u1u 2 into

u 2
2 u 2
2 u1 1 u1
u1

ch

and
c
QED

v
2
t
r r
t
z 2
r

## Combined Flow - Carillos Theorem (1942)

The previous discussion lead to :
u uh uv

u0 u0 u0
That means :

1 - U 1 U 1 U
h

## U v from Terzaghi' s theory

U h from Barron' s or Hansbo' s theory

## CE5101 Consolidation and Seepage

Lecture 8 PVD and Surcharge

OCT 2010

## Practical Vertical Drain Design

with Plaxis 2D-FEM

Outline

## Terzaghi 1D Vertical Flow Consolidation

Carillo Combined Flow Consolidation
Equivalent Plane Strain Consolidation for
2D-FEM

## CE5101 Consolidation and Seepage

Lecture 8 PVD and Surcharge

OCT 2010

Consolidation
For

## T v 0.2, i.e. U v 0.5

Then

For

Then

Uv 2

Tv is Time factor
cv is
i Coeficient
C fi i t off
Consolidation

Tv

cv t
H2
k
cv v
mv w
Tv

## T v 0.2, i.e. U v 0.5

Uv 1

2
Tv
4

1 e

Tv 0.21
4

Consolidation
Equal Vertical Strain Condition
8Th

U h 1
1 e

ch is Coeficient of
Consolidation

n2
3 1
1
ln n 2 1 2
2
n 1
4 n 4n

## For n=D/d > 10

Th is Time factor

ln(n)

3
4

## To include smear and drain

discharge
di
h
k
n k
3
s ln( ) h ln(s) z ( 2 L z ) h
s kr
qw
4

ch t
D2
k
ch h
mv w
Th

## Where z = L for single drainage at top,

and z = L/2 for double drainage at top and bottom

## CE5101 Consolidation and Seepage

Lecture 8 PVD and Surcharge

OCT 2010

ct
8Th
U r 1 exp
; Th h 2
D

where :

n2
3n 2 1
ln(n)
n 1
4n 2
2

8Th
ct
U rz 1 exp
; Th h 2
s
D
where : s ln

k
n kc
3

ln(m) z 2 L z c
m k 'c
4
qw

## For single drainage at

top,
top
z=L
For double drainage at
top and bottom, z=L/2

## Carillo Combined Flow

U vh 1 (1 U v )(1 U h )
For Tv > 0.2
Uv > 50%

1Uv e
1Uh e

Tv 0.21
4

8Th

U vh 1 e
For Tv 0.2
Uv 50%

## From linear superposition

2
8T
Tv 0.21 h

U vh 1 1 2 Tv / e

8Th

## CE5101 Consolidation and Seepage

Lecture 8 PVD and Surcharge

OCT 2010

## Equivalent Vertical Permeability for

Plane Strain FEM Model CUR 191 or Tan 1981
Interested only in solution > 50% consolidation
For Axisymmetric Unit Cell

U vh 1 e

U v' 1 e

2
8T
Tv 0.21 h

2
Tv ' 0.21
4

U v ' U vh

U v' 1 e
Tv ' Tv
kv ' kv

Tv ' 0.21
4

32 Th

1 e
Tv

32 H 2
kh
2 D 2

2
8T
Tv 0.21 h

cv t
k
and cv v
H2
mv w

Th

ch t
k
and ch h
D2
mv w

## In 2D-FEM only need to replace PVD soil

cluster with enhanced vertical kv model

## Practical PVD Design

Practical Vertical Drain Design (by Prof Harry Tan SEP 2008)
Terzaghi 1D Vertical Consolidation

## H=L single drainage and H=L/2 double drainage

INPUT
cv(m2/y)
2
2

Case
1
2

H(m)
5
5

t(y)
0.25
0.25

Tv
0.02
0.02

U h 1 exp

Uv
0.16
0.16

where
h : s ln
l

INPUT
ch(m2/y) S (m)
5
1.30
5
1.50

Case
1
2

D(m)
1.365
1.575

t(y)
0.25
0.25

Th
0.67
0.50

8Th

d(m)
0.050
0.050

ds(m)
0.100
0.100

kh (m/y)
0.0050
0.0050

ks (m/y)
0.0020
0.0020

qw (m3/y)
100
100

; Th

ch t
D2

k
3
n kh
lln(( s ) z 2 L z h
s ks
4
qw
z=L single drainage and z=L/2 double drainage
L(m)
z(m)
n
s
mu
10
5
27.3
2
3.61
10
5
31.5
2
3.75

Uh
0.77
0.66

Case
1
2

Uv
0.16
0.16

Uh
0.77
0.66

Uvh
0.81
0.71

Case
1
2

## Po (kPa) Pf (kPa) Usr=Uvh log[(Po+Pf)/Po] (Po+Pf+Ps/Po) Ps (kPa) Hs (m)

100
60
0.81
0.204
1.786
18.6
1.0
100
60
0.71
0.204
1.933
33.3
1.9

U sr

Sf
S f s

P Pf

log 0
P0
P0 Pf Ps
log
P0

Note: D=1.05s for triangular grid or 1.13s for square grid pattern
and z=L drain at top; or z=L/2 drain top and bottom of PVD

If Uvh meets or exceeds requirements, design is adequate
20

10

## CE5101 Consolidation and Seepage

Lecture 8 PVD and Surcharge

## Prof Harry Tan

OCT 2010

Johnson ASCE 1970
Assumptions:
a. Primary and secondary compression
are separate
b. Instant load applied at end of
c. Time
Ti rate
r t off settlement
ttl
t determine
d t r i bby
Terzaghi theory
21

Johnson ASCE 1970
Objective: To determine amount of surcharge needed to achieve desired
degree of consolidation?
'
v

Ps
Surcharge Ps
Pf

## Design Permanent Fill Pf

Clay: Ho, Po and Cc

tsr
Sf

Sf+s

## If surcharge is left in place for tsr

(time to removal), then clay will
have compressed by amount
equal to Sf expected under fill
weight alone, ie achieved

22

11

## CE5101 Consolidation and Seepage

Lecture 8 PVD and Surcharge

## Prof Harry Tan

OCT 2010

For Normally Consolidated Clay (NC) of thickness Ho:
P Pf
Cc
H 0 log 0
1 e0
P0

(1)

P0 Pf Ps
C
(2)
Fill and surcharge : S f s c H 0 log
P0
1 e0

Sf

Fill only :

P Pf

log 0
P0
Uf
1.0

U sr ( S f s )
P Pf Ps

U sr log 0
P0

Sf

(3)

## Therefore, required degree of consolidation under fill and surcharge is :

U f s

P Pf

log 0
P0
1.0
U sr

(S f s )
P Pf Ps

log 0
P0

Sf

(4)

23

Surcharge Ps
Design Permanent Fill Pf
Clay: Ho, Po and Cc

Fill only : S f

Clay 10m thick drained both top and bottom: eo=1.5, Po=100 kPa, Cc=0.5,
cv=5 m2/yr
Fill: Height = 3m with Pf = 60 kPa
Aim: To get 100% consolidation in 1 year, what is Ps needed?

P0 Pf
Cc
H 0 log
1 e0
P0

0.5
100 60

10 * log
0.408m
100
1 1.5

c vt
5 *1
2 0.2
5
H2
T
0 .2
Uv 2 v 2

Terzaghi theory : Tv

## To remove surcharge after tsr 1 yr, then

P Pf
160

log 0
log

P0
100
S f s
160 Ps
P Pf Ps
log

log 0
100
P0

160 Ps 0.204
log
0.404

100 0.505
160 Ps
0.404
2.54
10

100
Ps 254 160 94 kPa 94/18 5.2 m of surcharge (very large)

U sr 0.505

Sf

## So surcharge alone is not effective

and we need PVD to reduce
surcharge time as well as amount of
surcharge needed
24

12

## CE5101 Consolidation and Seepage

Lecture 8 PVD and Surcharge

## Prof Harry Tan

OCT 2010

Surcharge Ps
Design Permanent Fill Pf
Clay: Ho, Po and Cc

Clay 10m thick drained both top and bottom: eo=1.5, Po=100 kPa, Cc=0.5,
cv=2 m2/yr, ch= 5 m2/yr
PVD parameters: d=0.05m, ds=0.1m, kh=0.005 m/yr, ks=0.002 m/yr, qw=100
m3/yr
Fill: Height = 3m with Pf = 60 kPa
Aim: To get 100% improvement in 3 months, what is Ps needed?

Practical Vertical Drain Design (by Prof Harry Tan SEP 2008)
Terzaghi 1D Vertical Consolidation

## H=L single drainage and H=L/2 double drainage

INPUT
cv(m2/y)
2
2

Case
1
2

H(m)
5
5

t(y)
0.25
0.25

Tv
0.02
0.02

U h 1 exp

Uv
0.16
0.16

INPUT
ch(m2/y) S (m)
5
1 30
1.30
5
1.50

D(m)
1 365
1.365
1.575

t(y)
0 25
0.25
0.25

Th
0 67
0.67
0.50

where : s ln

Case
1
2

8Th

d(m)
0 050
0.050
0.050

ds(m)
0 100
0.100
0.100

kh (m/y)
0 0050
0.0050
0.0050

ks (m/y)
0 0020
0.0020
0.0020

qw (m3/y)
100
100

; Th

ch t
D2

k
3
n kh
ln( s ) z 2 L z h
4
s ks
qw
z=L single drainage and z=L/2 double drainage
L(m)
z(m)
n
s
mu
10
5
27 3
27.3
2
3.61
3
61
10
5
31.5
2
3.75

Uh
0 77
0.77
0.66

Case
1
2

Uv
0.16
0.16

Uh
0.77
0.66

Uvh
0.81
0.71

Case
1
2

## Po (kPa) Pf (kPa) Usr=Uvh log[(Po+Pf)/Po] (Po+Pf+Ps/Po) Ps (kPa) Hs (m)

100
60
0.81
0.204
1.786
18.6
1.0
100
60
0.71
0.204
1.933
33.3
1.9

U sr

Sf
S f s

P Pf

log 0
P0
P0 Pf Ps

log
P0

Design requires PVD triangle spacing with 1.3m grid and 1m surcharge or 1.5m grid with 1.9m surcharge 25

FEM Modeling of
Embankments on Soft Ground
with PVD
1. Model of single PVD Axi-symmetric
2. Model of PVD in Plane Strain

13

## CE5101 Consolidation and Seepage

Lecture 8 PVD and Surcharge

OCT 2010

## Method 1 Using Interface Element for

Vertical Drain
Interface element in PLAXIS used
Impose specified cross-sectional area and
vertical permeability of vertical drain to
simulate well resistance
Effect of smear considered byy the
equivalent permeability of surrounding
soils

AXISYMMETRIC
z

z
r

Soil
qw

Soil

Interface
element

Soil

qw

PVD
Pore water flow

H
kh

Closed
consolidation
boundary

rw

re

(a)

Open Boundary

ti
rw

qw

re

(b)

Interface element

rw

re

(c)

Drain element

14

## CE5101 Consolidation and Seepage

Lecture 8 PVD and Surcharge

OCT 2010

## FEM Model Barron Theory

E_oed=1000 kPa
Boundary
conditions

Cv_soil = 0.01*1000/10 = 1
m2/day
Cv_drain=1*1000/10=100 m2/day

30

15

## CE5101 Consolidation and Seepage

Lecture 8 PVD and Surcharge

OCT 2010

## FEM Model Barron Theory

T=0.1day

31

Interface Element
Open Consolidation Boundary
Barron's Theory

Uh (%)

0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.001

0.01

0.1

10

100

Th

16

## CE5101 Consolidation and Seepage

Lecture 8 PVD and Surcharge

OCT 2010

PLANE STRAIN

x
s

s
m

A
P

m
2ti

(a)

2B

(b)

dw

2ti

de

2B or S

(c)

(d)

## FEM models investigated:

Axisymmetric model
no drainage (reference)
drainage with drain element
(sets zero pore pressure conditions)

## drainage with boundary condition

(check on performance of drain element)

## Plane strain model

equivalent vertical permeability after CUR 191
equivalent horizontal permeability after CUR 191
equivalent horizontal permeability after Indraratna (2000)

17

## CE5101 Consolidation and Seepage

Lecture 8 PVD and Surcharge

OCT 2010

## unit cell for vertical drains placed in pattern of 2x2 m, 5

m high
drain diameter 25 cm

10 kN/m

axisymmetric
model

CUR 191

plane strain
model

## equivalent vertical permeability

H2
kv kv 2
k
D2 h
32

kh kh

3 1
1
n2
2 lnn 2 1

4 n 4 n 2
n 1

D
d

kv , kh true permeability
kv , kh equivalent permeability
H

drainage length

## equivalent distance of drains

diameter of drains

18

## CE5101 Consolidation and Seepage

Lecture 8 PVD and Surcharge

CUR 191

OCT 2010

## equivalent horizontal permeability

k v k v

B2
k h
kh
D2

n2
3 1
lnn 2
2
n 1
4 n
U

0,5
2,26

1
2
4 n

0,75
2,75

0,9
2,94

0,95
3,01

D
d
0,99
3,09

kv , kh true permeability
kv , kh equivalent permeability
H

## equivalent distance of drains

diameter of drains

Indraratna equivalent
horizontal permeability
k hpp

0,67
B2

k h ln n 0,75 R 2

khp
kh

R
rw

## equivalent horizontal permeability for plane strain

true horizontal permeability

## equivalent distance of drains

rw

diameter of drains

19

## CE5101 Consolidation and Seepage

Lecture 8 PVD and Surcharge

OCT 2010

## Influence of constitutive model

Excess Pore Pressure after 60% consolidation

## Linear Elastic - Model

degree of consolidation U [ - ]
d

1.0

HS - Model

## degree of consolidation for different

models (linear-elastic)

0.8

0.6

0.4

AXI: no drainage
AXI: drainage boundary condition
AXI drainage
AXI:
d i
d
drain-element
i l
t
PS: equivalent vertical CUR 191
PS: equivalent horizontal CUR 191
PS: equivalent horizontal Indraratna

02
0.2

0.0
1e+3

1e+4

1e+5

1e+6

1e+7

1e+8

1e+9

time [sec]

20

## CE5101 Consolidation and Seepage

Lecture 8 PVD and Surcharge

degree of consolidation U [ - ]
d

1.0

OCT 2010

## degree of consolidation for different

models (Hardening Soil model)

0.8

0.6

0.4

AXI: no drainage
AXI: drainage boundary condition
AXI: drainage
g drain-element
PS: equivalent vertical CUR 191
PS: equivalent horizontal CUR 191
PS: equivalent horizontal Indraratna

02
0.2

0.0
1e+3

1e+4

1e+5

1e+6

1e+7

1e+8

1e+9

1e+10

time [sec]

Austrian Case
B

WASSER
KANAL

A1/1

A1/9

A2/9

A1/8

PW3

A1/7

A1/6

A2/7

A2/6

PW4

A1/5

A1/3

A1/2

A2/4

A2/3

A2/1
A2/2

A3/4

A3/3

A3/2

E1

A2/5

A2/8

A1/4

A3/1
A3/7

A4/9
RS1/3

A4/8

A4/7

A5/8

A5/7

A5/5

A5/4

A5/3

A5/1
A5/2

A6/5

A6/4

A6/3

A6/1
A6/2

RS2/9

A5/9

RS2/8

A5/6

PW1
RS2/7

Z3/8

A6/7

E2

A6/6

RS2/6

A4/1
A4/2

A4/6

R/1
Z4/8

RS2/5

A7/4
RS2/4

A7/1
A7/2

A7/3

uerer Schutzstreifen

RS2/3

A8/3
5.0
5.0

A8/2
RS2/2

A8/1

RS2/1

Schttabschnitt 1
Schttabschnitt 2

HALLE
A4/3
A4/4
A4/5

BRO

A3/8

A3/5

Schttabschnitt 3

A3/9
X

A3/6

21

## CE5101 Consolidation and Seepage

Lecture 8 PVD and Surcharge

OCT 2010

soil profile:
= 18 kN/m3

3m
2,5 m

= 19,5 kN/m3

4,5 m

2m

## silt / silt-clay - undrained

kx = ky = 0,0001 m/day ; kx = 1,3e-5 m/day
peat - undrained
kx = ky = 0,005 m/day ; kx = 6,6e-4 m/day

14 m

## silt, clay - undrained

kx = ky = 0,0001 m/day ; kx = 1,3e-5 m/day

FE-MODEL

section D
D-D
D
A2/4

A4/4

A6/4

22

## CE5101 Consolidation and Seepage

Lecture 8 PVD and Surcharge

OCT 2010

## Results for section D-D

comparison measurement - Plaxis point A2/4

ssettlement [cm]

-20

calculated final
settlement
139 cm

-40

-60

-80
Plaxis
measurement

-100

-120
0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

time [days]

## Results for section D-D

comparison measurement - Plaxis - point A6/4

ssettlements [cm]

-10

calculated final
settlement
78 cm

-20

30
-30

Plaxis
measurements

-40

-50
0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

time [days]

23

## CE5101 Consolidation and Seepage

Lecture 8 PVD and Surcharge

OCT 2010

## EXAMPLE - EMBANKMENT CONSTRUCTION

influence of consolidation on stability

## influence of construction speed is investigated

"fast" construction: 2 days of consolidation per placement of 1 m embankment
"slow" construction: 3 days of consolidation per placement of 1 m layer embankment

## influence of consolidation on stability

"slow": max. excess pore
pressure: 86 kPa

## "fast": max. excess pore

pressure: 100 kPa

24

## CE5101 Consolidation and Seepage

Lecture 8 PVD and Surcharge

OCT 2010

"slow": stable

"fast": failure

## influence of consolidation on stability

excess pore pressure [kPa]

Chart 1

-50

slow

fast

fast

-40

-30

-20

slow

-10

0
0

12

16

Time [day]

time [days]

25

## CE5101 Consolidation and Seepage

Lecture 8 PVD and Surcharge

OCT 2010

## influence of consolidation on stability

vertical displacements [m]
Chart 1
Displacement [m]
0.06
Point C

Point C

fast

0.05

0.04

slow

0.03

0.02

0.01

0
0

30

60

90

120

Time [day]

time [days]

Practical Considerations

26

## CE5101 Consolidation and Seepage

Lecture 8 PVD and Surcharge

OCT 2010

## The Problem Bridge Foundations

Settlement with risk
for downdrag

## These photos of bridge

foundations illustrate a common
problem
bl affecting
ff ti maintenance
i t
(\$\$\$!), as well as, on occasions,
one compromising safety

27

## CE5101 Consolidation and Seepage

Lecture 8 PVD and Surcharge

OCT 2010

## Photos from in-situ excavation of a pile

The problem of lateral spreading can be avoided by not installing the piles until the
consolidation is mostly completed, which also would eliminate the risk for excessive
downdrag.
However, the project can rarely wait for the consolidation to develop, and the solution
would be impractical, unless the consolidation can be accelerated by means of vertical
drains. Apart from saving time, accelerating the consolidation also reduces the magnitude
of the lateral spreading and increases soil strength.
In the past, sand drains were used. Since about 25 years, the sand drains have been
replaced with wick drains, which are pre-manufactured bandshaped drains.

28

## CE5101 Consolidation and Seepage

Lecture 8 PVD and Surcharge

OCT 2010

Drainage Layer

St
u
1 t
Sf
u0

U AVG

UAVG
St
Sf
ut
u0

where

=
=
=
=
=

Clay Layer
(consolidating)

2H

## average degree of consolidation (U)

settlement
l
at Time
Ti t
final settlement at full consolidation
average pore pressure at Time t
initial average pore pressure (on application of the load at Time t = 0)

Drainage Layer

H2
cv

t Tv

where

## Tv = a dimensionless time coefficient:

cv = coefficient of consolidation
H = length of the longest drainage path
UAVG (%)
Tv

Tv 0.1 lg (1 U )

25

50

70

80

90

100

0.05

0.20

0.40

0.57

0.85

1.00

c/c

## Basic principle of consolidation process in

the presence of vertical drains

t Th

D2
ch

and

Th

c/c

1
D
1
[ln 0.75] ln
d
8
1 U h

D2
D
1
[ln 0.75] ln
8 ch
d
1U h

29

## CE5101 Consolidation and Seepage

Lecture 8 PVD and Surcharge

## Prof Harry Tan

OCT 2010

Important Points
Build-up of Back Pressure

## The consolidation process can be

halted if back-pressure is let to
build-up below the embankment
embankment,
falsely implying that the process is
completed

## Theoretically, vertical drains operate

by facilitating horizontal drainage.
H
However,
where
h pervious
i
llenses
and/or horizontal seams or bands
exist, the water will drain vertically
to the pervious soil and then to the
drain. When this is at hand, the drain
spacing can be increased
significantly.

30