You are on page 1of 48

Spatial variability

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

. • A unique character exhibited by soil and rock • Characterized by autocorrelation distance. • The common use of mean and point variance of a set of measurements for design ignores this aspect. the distance upto which the correlation of soil properties deemed to be appropriate.Spatial variability • Measured soil properties can exhibit considerable spatial variation even within relatively homogeneous deposits • They exhibit similar values at neighbouring locations than that at locations far away.

Spatial variability • Useful in random field modeling • Useful in the evaluation of variance reduction • Enables to critically assess and compare various site investigation and testing programs. and also to evaluate their effectiveness. .

coefficient of variation and scale of fluctuation are essential. • Scale of fluctuation of a soil property is closely related to the average distance between intersections of soil property and its mean. • Small values of scale of fluctuation imply rapid fluctuations about the mean. from point to point. its mean. • Large values suggest a slowly varying property. • The distance within which the soil property exhibits relatively strong or significant correlation. . with respect to the average.Spatial variability • In order to completely describe a soil property stochastically.

• Autocorrelation coefficient at a lag. • Autocorrelation function is a plot of autocorrelation coefficients at various lags. is the ratio of autocovariance at that lag (ck) and the variance of the data (c0). . autocorrelation function is first obtained for the data under consideration. k.Spatial variability • For getting autocorrelation or scale of fluctuation of a soil property.

is called sample autocorrelation function. the correlation coefficients are obtained from sample. . The autocorrelation function. represented as rk. thus obtained.Spatial variability • Since we always play with limited dataset in geotechnical engineering.

1996).(Auto)correlation distance • Autocorrelation function is used to estimate the autocorrelation distance. • Scale of fluctuation is numerically related to autocorrelation distance. • The distance at which autocorrelation coefficient corresponds to 1/e (i. 37%). • Mathematically. is termed as autocorrelation distance (DeGroot. autocorrelation distance (or correlation length) is defined as the area under the autocorrelation function. and its value depends on the shape of the autocorrelation function.e. .

Scale of fluctuation .

Scale of fluctuation (Spry et al. 1988) ..

Correlation distance • Commonly used analytical models to fit sample autocorrelation functions: .

Observed scales of fluctuation (Phoon et al. 1995) ..

Spatial variability – Keswick Clay – Adelaide University. Australia Jaksa et al. (1999) .

How to estimate autocorrelation distance? where. . If correlation distance is to be finite then r(t) must decrease sufficiently quickly to zero as t increases. and r(t) is the autocorrelation function. theta is autocorrelation distance (or correlation length) .

Vertical Spatial variability (C8 profile) – Dasaka (2005) .

Vertical Spatial variability (C8 profile) – Dasaka (2005) .

Vertical Spatial variability (C8 profile) – Dasaka (2005) .

Vertical Scale of fluctuation (C8 profile) – Dasaka (2005) .

39 m. 2005) Autocorrelation distance and scale of fluctuation of vertical qc are 0.22 and 0. respectively. .Spatial variability analysis at a power plant site in India (Dasaka.

Variance reduction function (Babu et al. 2006) ..

Spatial variability – Keswick Clay – Adelaide University. Australia Jaksa et al. (1999) .

Vertical Spatial variability (C8 profile) – Dasaka (2005) .

Vertical Spatial variability (C8 profile) – Dasaka (2005) .

Vertical Spatial variability (C8 profile) – Dasaka (2005) .

Vertical Scale of fluctuation (C8 profile) – Dasaka (2005) .

Spatial variability analysis at a power plant site in India (Dasaka.39 m. respectively.22 and 0. . 2005) Autocorrelation distance and scale of fluctuation of vertical qc are 0.

2006) ..Variance reduction function (Babu et al.

Assessing SPT-based probabilistic models for liquefaction potential evaluation: a 10-year update. Load and resistance factor design (LRFD) calibration for steel grid reinforced soil walls. 2013.Important topics • 1. Georisk . Issue 3. Volume 7. Issue 3-4. 2011.Volume 5. Juang et al. Bathurst et al. Georisk • 2.

Hata et al. Georisk • 4. Reliability of shallow foundations designed to Eurocode 7. 2010. Issue 4. 2001. pages 73-88 . Forrest et al. A probabilistic evaluation of the size of earthquake induced slope failure for an embankment.Important topics • 3.Volume 4.

Uzielli & Mayne pages 50-69.Important topics • 5. 2011. Load-displacement uncertainty of vertically loaded shallow footings on sands and effects on probabilistic settlement estimation. Georisk .

Important topics • 6. United Arab Emirates. Aldama-Bustos et al. pages 1-29. Reliability analysis of strength of cement treated soils. Dubai and Ra's Al Khaymah. Georisk • 7. Probabilistic seismic hazard analysis for rock sites in the cities of Abu Dhabi. 2009. Sivakumar Babu et al. 2010. Georisk . pages 157-162.

2007. pages 177-189. Georisk .Important topics • 8. Assessment of flood risks in Pearl River Delta due to levee breaching. 2009. Georisk • 9. pages 44-54. pages 122-133. Zhang. Low et al. et al. Reliability analysis of soil nail walls Sivakumar Babu & Vikas. Georisk • 10. Slope reliability analysis accounting for spatial variation.

Probability of scour depth exceedance owing to hydrologic uncertainty. pages 77-88. 2012. Probabilistic analysis of strip footings resting on a spatially random soil using subset simulation approach. Georisk . Ahmed & Soubra. Georisk • 12. pages 188-201. Briaud et al. 2007.Important topics • 11.

Wang. Probabilistic analysis of a onedimensional soil consolidation problem. 2011. MCS-based probabilistic design of embedded sheet pile walls. 2013. Georisk • 14. Georisk . pages 151-162. pages 36-49. Houmadi et al.Important topics • 13.

pages 209-224. 2010.Important topics • 15. Georisk . Probability distribution for mobilised shear strengths of spatially variable soils under uniform stress states. Zevgolis & Bourdeau pages 148-156. 2013 • 16. System reliability analysis of the external stability of reinforced soil structures. Ching & Phoon.

Geotech. GSP-226.. Whitman. 2012. pp. Proceedings: Geotechnical Engineering State of the Art and Practice. 143–188. Risk Assessment in Geotechnical Engineering: Stability Analysis of Highly Variable Soils.” J.Important topics • 17. ”Evaluating Calculated Risk in Geotechnical Engineering. R. Engrg. (1984). 110(2). Griffiths et al. 78-101 • 18. .

No. 307–316. Eng. (2000). ”Factors of Safety and Reliability in Geotechnical Engineering. 116.” J. 126(4). Duncan.. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering Nov 1990. Phoon et al. • 20. Vol. 1717-1734 . Geotech. J. pp. Geoenviron. 11. Reliability Analysis of Pile Settlement.Important topics • 19.

163-173 . Geotech. Eng. pp. Chalermyanont and Benson. Geoenviron. 5. Geotech. Vol. pp.Important topics • 21.. Vol. 2. No. 132. Geoenviron. Eng. 2004. 622-630 • 22. May 2006. No. 130. Reliability-Based Design for Internal Stability of Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls. Impact of Routine Quality Assurance on Reliability of Bored Piles. Zhang et al..

Geoenviron. Geotech. 2008. 10..Important topics • 23. pp. 134. 145-153 . Reliability Assessment of Basal-Heave Stability for Braced Excavations in Clay Goh et al. Eng. No. . 2008. 2. Geotech. Reliability Analysis and Updating of Excavation-Induced Ground Settlement for Building Serviceability Assessment. Vol. pp.. 134. 1448-1458 • 24. Eng. Geoenviron. No. Vol. Hsiao et al.