Drained or Undrained:

Is That the Question?

Amin Rismanchian
Nick Ramsey

Feb. 2014

© Fugro 2013 www.fugro.com

 What I am going to talk about

What do I mean by “Drained” and “Undrained”?

Relevant soil parameters, and methods of assessing these parameters

Drained vs. undrained breakout resistance

Flaws of current methods

Conclusions

Date www.fugro.com
 What do I mean by “drained” and “undrained”?

 “Fully Drained is the condition under which water is able to

flow into or out of a mass of soil in the length of time that
the soil is subjected to some change in load.”

 “Fully Undrained is the condition under which there is no

flow of water into or out of a mass of soil in the length of
time that the soil is subjected to some change in load.
Changes in load cause changes in pore water pressure,
because the water cannot move into or out in response to
the tendency of volume change.”

 Partially drained is the “twilight zone” between fully

drained and fully undrained behaviour.
www.fugro.com
(Duncan and Wright 2005)
 Example: Cone Penetration Test, Offshore WA
Cone penetration resistance, qc (MPa) Pore pressure (MPa)
0 0.5 1 -0.05 -0.025 0 0.025 0.05
0

0.5
Depth below mudline (m)

1
Is this test indicating
undrained/drained or
1.5 partially drained
conditions in the
2
surficial soils?
Generated pore
pressure, u2

2.5 Hydrostatic
pore pressure,
uo

This slide is an example of a CPT performed in NWS Australia. Studying the excess pore pressures graph shows that both
negative and positive excess pore pressures have been generated during this test, indicating an undrained condition based on
the definition. However, we are not sure if it was really undrained or partially drained. Also we do not know how much the
viscous effect contributed in the penetration resistance.

www.fugro.com
 Twilight Zone: Partially Drained

1000
Zone Soil Type
2
1a SILTS and low Ir
CLAYS
100 1b CLAYS

2 Essentially
Qt (-)

drained SANDS
3 Transitional
10
1a soils
3

1b

1
-2 -1 0 1 2

Δu/σ′vo (-)
Refer to Schneider et al. (2008) for the boundary lines.

www.fugro.com
 Twilight Zone: Partially Drained

1000
Zone Soil Type
2
1a SILTS and low Ir
CLAYS
100 1b CLAYS

2 Essentially
Qt (-)

drained SANDS
3 Transitional
10
1a soils
3

1b

1
-2 -1 0 1 2

Δu/σ′vo (-)
Refer to Schneider et al. (2008) for the boundary lines.

www.fugro.com
 Twilight Zone: Partially Drained

1000
Zone Soil Type
2
1a SILTS and low Ir
CLAYS
100 1b CLAYS

2 Essentially
Qt (-)

drained SANDS
3 Transitional
10
1a soils
3

1b

1
-2 -1 0 1 2

Δu/σ′vo (-)
Refer to Schneider et al. (2008) for the boundary lines.

www.fugro.com
 Twilight Zone: Partially Drained

1000
Zone Soil Type
2
1a SILTS and low Ir
CLAYS
100 1b CLAYS

2 Essentially
Qt

drained SANDS
3 Transitional
10
1a soils
3
When we plot the results of the CPT
example from the previous slide on
1b Schnider et al. (2008) chart, it is noted that
the behaviour of this soil generally was
1 partially drained. Can we use the results of
-2 -1 0 1 2 this CPT in the design of drained or
undrained cases?

Δu/σ′vo
Refer to Schneider et al. (2008) for the boundary lines.

www.fugro.com
 Example: Cone Penetration Test, Offshore WA
Cone penetration resistance, qc (MPa)
Pore pressure (MPa)
0 0.5 1 -0.05 -0.025 0 0.025 0.05
0

Fully drained
0.5
Fully undrained
Depth below mudline (m)

1 Twilight zone
(partially drained)

1.5

2
Generated pore
pressure, u2

2.5 Hydrostatic
pore pressure,
uo

www.fugro.com
 Drainage is a Function of the Normalised Velocity
Drained Partially drained Undrained
penetration penetration penetration
Spool
CPT
Penetration resistance

Spudcan
penetration

Twilight zone
Pipeline
penetration

Normalised velocity of vd/cv is used to assess the drainage behaviour of soil. Where v is the penetration rate, d is the diameter of
the penetrometer and cv is the coefficient of consolidation. Randolph and hope (2004) and Schneider et al. (2007) among other
researchers showed that for V>30-100 the behaviour is undrained and for V<0.01-0.03 the behaviour is drained.
Therefore, for the same soil penetration resistance of a spudcan can be lower than the recorded resistance by a CPT.
www.fugro.com
 Parameters Affecting Drainage Behaviour of Soil

 Rate and duration of loading/shearing

– Estimated from
installation/operation conditions
 Drainage length
– Estimated from the geometry of the
problem
 Coefficient of consolidation
– Laboratory methods
• Rowe cell
• CRS
• Indirectly from permeability
– Estimated from in-situ tests:
• Dissipation tests
• Twitch tests
• Parkable piezoprobe
(Chatterjee et al. 2014)
(Randolph and Hope 2004)

www.fugro.com
 Parameters Affecting Drainage Behaviour of Soil

 Rate and duration of loading/shearing Range of uncertainty: Depends on

– Estimated from the application. Sometimes very
installation/operation conditions high.
 Drainage length
Range of uncertainty: Up to 1.5
– Estimated from the geometry of the
times
problem
 Coefficient of consolidation Range of uncertainty: 100 to 1,000
– Laboratory methods times
• Rowe cell But it can be decreased!
• CRS
• Indirectly from permeability
– Estimated from in-situ tests:
• Dissipation tests
• Twitch tests
• Parkable piezoprobe
(Chatterjee et al. 2014)
(Randolph and Hope 2004)

www.fugro.com
 What I am going to talk about

 What do I mean by “Drained” and “Undrained”?

 Relevant soil parameters, and methods of assessing these parameters

Drained vs. undrained breakout resistance

Flaws of current methods

Conclusions

Date www.fugro.com
 Why Drainage is the Question

Dilatant soil (e.g.

Lateral silty SAND/sandy
Short breakout duration;
equivalent SILT in NWS)
friction factor,
impermeable soil Twilight zone
H/W′
Undrained
behaviour

Long breakout duration;

‘Snap’ permeable soil
buckling
Slow thermally- Drained
induced buckling behaviour

Normalised time, T = cvt/D2

Significant difference in lateral equivalent friction factor

dependent on breakout duration
www.fugro.com
 Why Drainage is the Question
More permeable soil Dilatant soil (e.g.
Lateral (or longer breakout duration) silty SAND/sandy
Short breakout duration;
equivalent SILT in NWS)
impermeable soil
friction factor,
H/W′
Undrained
behaviour

Long breakout duration;

‘Snap’ permeable soil
buckling
Slow thermally- Drained
induced feed-in behaviour

Normalised time, T = cvt/D2

Insignificant difference in lateral equivalent friction factor

dependent on breakout duration
www.fugro.com
 Why Drainage is the Question

Less permeable soil Dilatant soil (e.g.

Lateral (or shorter breakout duration) silty SAND/sandy
Short breakout duration;
equivalent SILT in NWS)
impermeable soil
friction factor,
H/W′
Undrained
behaviour

Long breakout duration;

‘Snap’ permeable soil
buckling
Slow thermally- Drained
induced feed-in behaviour

Normalised time, T = cvt/D2

Insignificant difference in lateral equivalent friction factor

dependent on breakout duration
www.fugro.com
 High Uncertainty

Lateral H/W′
equivalent
friction factor, UB
H/W′ UB UB
BE
LB

Undrained P50
behaviour

Possible Drained
values Best estimate behaviour
LB
LB

Uncertainty

Normalised time, T = cvt/D2 Probability

www.fugro.com
 Reducing the Uncertainty
Reasonable definition of volume change behaviour and velocities
 Narrowing of uncertainty
Lateral
equivalent H/W′
friction factor,
H/W′
UB
UB UB
BE
LB P50

Undrained LB
behaviour

Possible Drained
values behaviour
Best estimate

LB

Uncertainty
Normalised time, T = cvt/D2 Probability

www.fugro.com
Conclusions and Discussions
 Every soil type can behave drained/partially-drained/undrained
depending on:
– Rate or duration of loading
– Drainage length
– Coefficient of consolidation (cv)
 Site investigations should be specifically targeted to suit the field events
and design requirements
 In specific soils (e.g. silty sands/sandy silts) both drained and undrained
behaviours should be checked
 Narrowing down the range of the above parameters, significantly
reduces uncertainties (e.g. by in-situ estimation of cv)
 There is no means of being conservative or unconservative.

www.fugro.com
 Acknowledgments

 First author:
– Prof. David White, Dr. Fraser Bransby and other
colleagues at Fugro.

Thank You

All materials and content contained within this presentation remain the property of Fugro (© Fugro 2013) and may not be copied,
reproduced, distributed or displayed without Fugro's express written permission. All third party information featured within the
presentation remains the intellectual property of their respective originators.

www.fugro.com