Professional Documents
Culture Documents
ABSTRACT: On a macroscale, the effect of installing prefabricated vertical drains (PVDs) in a subsoil is to
increase the mass hydraulic conductivity of the subsoil in the vertical direction. Based on this concept, a simple
method for modeling PVD improved subsoils is proposed, in which an equivalent vertical hydraulic conductivity
kv e for the PVD improved subsoil is explicitly derived. With the proposed simple method, analysis of PVD
improved subsoil is the same as that of the unimproved case. The theoretical verification of the simple method
was made under 1D condition. The calculated average degree of consolidation and excess pore pressure distri-
bution in the vertical direction using the simple method are compared with existing theoretical solutions (com-
bination of Terzaghi’s consolidation theory and Hansbo’s solution for PVD consolidation). It has been proved
theoretically that, in terms of average degree of consolidation, in the case of one layer and ignoring the vertical
drainage of natural subsoil, the maximum error of the proposed method is 10% compared with Hansbo’s solution.
For the case of one layer or multilayers and considering both vertical and radial drainages with the parameters
adopted here, the maximum error of the proposed method is 5%. The multilayer case was analyzed by FEM
method, and the proposed simple method is compared with that of using 1D drainage elements. Then, 2D finite-
element analyses were conducted for three case histories of embankments on PVD improved subsoils. One case
is discussed in detail. The analyses using both the simple method and 1D drainage elements, were conducted.
It is shown that for all three cases, the simple method yielded results as good as those using 1D drainage
elements.
accuracy of the proposed method are discussed. Finally, the where Th = time factor = Ch t/D e2, in which Ch = coefficient of
1
consolidation in horizontal direction, De = diameter of unit
Assoc. Prof., Inst. of Lowland Technol., Saga Univ., 1 Honjo, Saga cell, and t = time. The value of can be expressed
840-8502, Japan.
2
Lect., Inst. of Lowland Technol., Saga Univ., 1 Honjo, Saga 840-8502,
n kh 3 2l 2kh
Japan. = ln ⫹ ln(s) ⫺ ⫹ (3)
3
Prof., Dept. of Civ. Engrg., Saga Univ., 1 Honjo, Saga 840-8502, s ks 4 3qw
Japan.
4
Prof., School of Civ. Engrg., Asian Inst. of Technol., P.O. Box 4, where n = De /dw (dw = diameter of drain); s = ds /dw (ds =
Klong Luang, Pathumthani, 12120 Thailand. diameter of smear zone); kh and ks = horizontal hydraulic con-
Note. Discussion open until April 1, 2002. To extend the closing date ductivities of the natural soil and smear zone, respectively; l
one month, a written request must be filed with the ASCE Manager of = drainage length; and qw = discharge capacity of PVD.
Journals. The manuscript for this paper was submitted for review and
possible publication on March 26, 2000; revised May 29, 2001. This
To obtain a simple expression for the equivalent vertical
paper is part of the Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental hydraulic conductivity kve , an approximation of Terzaghi’s so-
Engineering, Vol. 127, No. 11, November, 2001. 䉷ASCE, ISSN 1090- lution for the average degree of vertical consolidation is pro-
0241/01/0011-0965–0972/$8.00 ⫹ $.50 per page. Paper No. 22383. posed
JOURNAL OF GEOTECHNICAL AND GEOENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING / NOVEMBER 2001 / 965
Uv = 1 ⫺ exp(⫺Cd Tv) (4) studied here, the maximum error of the proposed method
is within 5%. In this case, ignoring the vertical drainage
where Tv = time factor for vertical consolidation = Cv t/H 2, in of natural subsoil, the maximum error between (4) and
which Cv = coefficient of consolidation in the vertical direction Terzaghi’s solution is 10%. Because (4) takes the same
and H = vertical drainage length (in this study H = l ); and Cd form as (2) (Hansbo’s solution), the maximum error be-
= constant. To determine the value of Cd , the following factors tween the proposed method (converting PVD effect to an
are considered: equivalent vertical hydraulic conductivity) and Hansbo’s
solution (PVD consolidation) is 10% also. Then, the
• Eq. (4) is used to obtain the kve value only. After kv e is equivalent vertical hydraulic conductivity kve can be ex-
determined, the degree of consolidation of PVD improved pressed
subsoil is calculated using Terzaghi’s theory for the 1D
case and Biot’s theory (1941) for 2D or 3D problems.
• As shown in Fig. 1, under the condition that, at Uv = 50%,
(4) can yield the same result as that of Terzaghi’s theory,
kve = 冉
1⫹
D 2e kv
冊
2.5l 2 kh
kv (5)
Cd can be assumed as 3.54. In this case, for Uv < 50%, where kv = hydraulic conductivity in the vertical direction.
(4) underestimates, and, for Uv > 50%, it overestimates Other parameters are defined previously.
the average degree of consolidation with a maximum error
of <10%. Therefore, for converting the PVD effect into
kv e , if one ignores the effect of vertical drainage of natural For multilayer conditions, when using (5) to calculate the
subsoil, Cd = 3.54 is the best value. kve value of each layer, it is simply assumed that the drainage
• By considering the effects of both vertical drainage of length l is the same as the total thickness H of the PVD-
natural subsoil and radial drainage of PVD, the maximum improved zone for one-way drainage (l = H ) and l = H/2 for
error on the average degree of consolidation can be re- two-way drainage. One-way or two-way drainage conditions
duced. However, with Cd = 3.54, the range of underesti- should be applied based on the condition of the PVD improved
mation will be more than half. zone only. In the case where a clay deposit is in two-way
• The best value of Cd is a function of relative importance drainage conditions but the PVDs are not penetrated through
of vertical and radial drainage, which varies from case to the whole thickness of the layer, then for the PVD-improved
case. In this study, Cd = 3.2 is proposed. With Cd = 3.2, zone, one-way drainage condition should be applied, as illus-
in terms of average degree of consolidation, for the cases trated in Fig. 2.
It needs to be emphasized that the 1D condition is used to
obtain the kve value, which does not mean that the proposed
method can only be used in 1D analysis. A PVD-improved
zone with a vertical hydraulic conductivity of kve and horizon-
tal value of kh can be analyzed in 1D, 2D, or 3D, depending
on the requirements.
Multilayer Subsoil
The uniform subsoil condition is rarely encountered in en-
gineering practice. A common situation is that there is a weath-
ered crust with higher hydraulic conductivity underlain by soft
layers. A two-layer subsoil model is also indicated in Fig. 3
(right side). The values of hydraulic conductivities of Layer 1
are kv1 = 2 ⫻ 10⫺8 m/s and kh1 = 2kv1 , and the elastic modulus
of Layer 1 E1 is 8,000 kPa. Other soil parameters for Layers
1 and 2 and the drain parameters are the same as those tabu-
lated in Table 1. Consequently, the coefficient of consolidation
of Layer 1 Cv 1 is four times that of Layer 2 Cv 2 .
For the multilayer subsoil, a 1D rigorous closed-form so-
lution is not available and FEM was used for calculation. The
base FEM solutions used for comparison with FEM solutions
FIG. 4. Comparison of Average Degree of Consolidation (Uniform using the simple approximate method are calculated by a
Case) method in which the radial drainage due to PVD is modeled
by 1D drainage elements (Chai et al. 1995).
Uniform Subsoil Case Fig. 6 compares the average degree of consolidation, which
shows that the maximum difference is about 5%. In Fig. 6,
The assumed 1D conditions are illustrated in Fig. 3 (left the time factor Tv e was calculated by using the weighted (by
side). The assumed subsoil and drain parameters are listed in the layer thickness) average value of the coefficient of con-
Table 1. It needs to be mentioned that the absolute values of solidation in the vertical direction. The distribution of excess
the involved parameters have no effect on the tendency of pore pressure with depth is given in Fig. 7. Because of the
comparison. With these conditions, (5) yields an equivalent higher hydraulic conductivity of Layer 1, the difference in Fig.
vertical hydraulic conductivity of 11.94kv . 7 is smaller than that of the uniform case (Fig. 5).
The comparison of the average degree of consolidation is
shown in Fig. 4. It can be seen that the maximum difference Discussion
between the simple approximate method and the theoretical
solution is about 5%. The excess pore pressure distribution in Regarding the accuracy of the simple approximate method,
the vertical direction is compared in Fig. 5 at the average de- a theoretical conclusion is that the error on the average degree
gree of consolidation of 50%. The proposed method indicates of consolidation is <10% in the 1D condition. The above com-
a faster excess pore pressure dissipation at the upper part and parisons are made for the assumed cases, and the relative er-
JOURNAL OF GEOTECHNICAL AND GEOENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING / NOVEMBER 2001 / 967
APPLICATION OF PROPOSED METHOD TO CASE
HISTORIES
The proposed method was applied to analyze three case his-
tories of embankment on PVD improved subsoil under the
plane strain condition (2D), in which only one case is pre-
sented in detail and the other two are presented briefly. Case
1 is a test embankment at Hangzhou-Ningbo (HN) Expressway
in eastern China, which is discussed in detail. The other two
briefly discussed cases consist of test embankments at Saga
Airport, Japan and Nong Ngu Hao, Thailand. The analyses
using drainage elements (Chai et al. 1995) to represent the
effect of the PVD were also conducted. It is worth mentioning
that, using the concept of equivalent hydraulic conductivity
proposed in this study, FEM analysis can be conducted using
standard programs. The results obtained using the proposed
simple method are compared with those obtained using drain-
age elements in terms of settlement curves, excess pore pres-
sures, and lateral displacement profiles. Both FEM analysis
FIG. 6. Comparison of Average Degree of Consolidation (Two-Layer results are compared to measured data also.
Case)
Modeling Methods
In the following analyses, the behavior of clay layers was
modeled by a modified Cam-clay model (Roscoe and Burland
1968). All soil parameters of clay layers were estimated based
on test results, except for Poisson’s ratio and hydraulic con-
ductivity of subsoil. The hydraulic conductivity was back-cal-
culated from the test embankments on natural subsoil at the
same site or near the test sites (Chai and Miura 1999; Shen et
al. 2000). During consolidation, the hydraulic conductivity is
varied with the void ratio according to Taylor’s equation
(1948). The parameter Ck in Taylor’s equation was taken as
0.4eo to 0.5eo (eo is initial void ratio). Sand layers and em-
bankment fill materials were treated as elastic materials, and
the Young’s modulus E and Poisson’s ratio were assumed
empirically.
The parameters related to the behavior of PVD were eval-
uated by the methods proposed by Chai and Miura (1999).
The methods can be briefly described as follows:
FIG. 7. Comparison of Excess Pore Pressure Distribution (Two-Layer • Discharge capacity of PVD—The discharge capacity qw
Case) of PVD needs to be determined by a long-term confined
in-clay test. If there are no test data available, based on
the writers’ experience, qw ⬵ 100 m3/year is suggested for
rors would only be valid for those cases. Generally, the relative preliminary design.
error is affected by the following factors: • Smear-zone diameter—The smear zone diameter ds can
be estimated
• Relative significance of vertical to radial drainage effects ds = 3dm (6)
—The smaller the effect of vertical drainage of natural where dm = area equivalent diameter of mandrel for in-
subsoil, the larger the error will be. stalling PVD.
• Effect of well resistance—The effect of well resistance • The ratio of kh /ks —An equation for evaluating the field
tends to be given in a nonuniform excess pore pressure value of (kh /ks)f is as follows:
冉冊 冉冊
distribution with depth. Therefore, the larger the well re-
sistance, the smaller the error will be. Field evidence kh kh
= Cf ⭈ (7)
showed that, because of the clogging effect, the well re- ks f ks L
sistance of PVD is quite high (or the discharge capacity
of PVD is small) (Chai and Miura 1999). where Cf = ratio of field hydraulic conductivity (kh)f over
• Vertical drainage length—The larger the vertical drainage the corresponding laboratory value (kh)L . A laboratory test
length l and the smaller the drain spacing S (larger l/S ), normally underestimates the field hydraulic conductivity,
the larger the error will be. and Cf > 1.0. The value of Cf needs to be determined by
• The uniformity of subsoil—As shown in the above com- back-analysis or field and laboratory hydraulic conductiv-
parisons, for multilayer and topsoil with a higher hydrau- ity tests. The value of (kh /ks)L = laboratory value of the
lic conductivity case, the error of the simple approximate hydraulic conductivity ratio.
method can be reduced. This is because the higher hy-
Test Embankment on Soft Mucky Clay Deposit in
draulic conductivity of the upper layer increases the effect
Eastern China
of vertical drainage. Actually, for most natural deposits,
the hydraulic conductivity of the top layer is higher than The (HN) expressway is located at the southern coast of
that of the underlying layer. Hangzhou Bay, as shown in Fig. 8. It starts from Hangzhou,
968 / JOURNAL OF GEOTECHNICAL AND GEOENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING / NOVEMBER 2001
improved subsoil and the main instrumentation points. A 0.5-
m-thick sand mat was placed on top of the soft ground. De-
composed granite was laid out and compacted in layers to a
unit weight of about 20 kN/m3. The height of the embankment
was 5.88 m. PVDs were installed to 19-m depth in a triangular
pattern with a spacing of 1.5 m.
E ␥ kh kv kv e
Layer (kPa) M e0 (kN/m3) (10⫺8 m/s) (10⫺8 m/s) (10⫺8 m/s)
TC — 0.3 0.008 0.08 1.0 0.81 19.3 3.51 3.51 39.8
SC1 — 0.35 0.016 0.16 1.0 1.07 18.5 0.65 0.26 8.45
MC — 0.35 0.028 0.28 0.8 1.36 17.3 2.94 1.96 33.5
SMC — 0.35 0.018 0.18 0.8 1.10 17.9 2.39 1.17 27.9
SC2 — 0.3 0.010 0.10 1.0 0.81 19.3 0.45 0.21 6.03
CS 25,000 0.25 — — — — 19.5 29.98 29.98 —
Fill 30,000 0.2 — — — — 20.0 224.0 224.0 —
piezometer. For test embankments on Muar clay, Malay- Test Embankment on Soft Ariake Clay Deposit at Saga
sia, some piezometers showed no excess pore pressure Airport, Japan
dissipation during the consolidation period. Upon instal-
lation of new piezometers at adjacent points, close to the The test embankments at Saga Airport were reported by
predicted values of excess pore pressures were measured Chai and Miura (1999), and a brief description is given here.
[Malaysia Highway Authority (MHA) 1989]. The site is located 13 km south of Saga City on a reclaimed
• Discharge capacity qw reduction of PVD with elapsed land close to the Ariake Sea. The deposit mainly consists of
time—In FEM analysis, a constant qw was adopted soft and highly compressible Ariake clay. The compression
whereas a laboratory long-term discharge capacity test index Cc is 1.0–2.0 and natural water content is 80–120%.
with clay confinement showed that qw was significantly The soft deposit is about 25 m thick, consisting of three al-
reduced with elapsed time (Chai and Miura 1999). The luvial clay layers and two thin alluvial sand layers. The top
constant qw tends to predict a faster excess pore pressure crust is about 1.0 m thick and is in an overconsolidated state
dissipation rate at a later stage of consolidation. However, with an overconsolidation ratio of about 4.0. Other clay layers
JOURNAL OF GEOTECHNICAL AND GEOENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING / NOVEMBER 2001 / 971
are in a normally to lightly overconsolidated state. The with those using 1D drainage elements. The main factor
groundwater level is about 1.0 m below the ground surface. influencing the accuracy of the proposed method is the
The test embankments were constructed on both natural and relative importance of vertical-to-radial drainage. The
PVD improved subsoils to investigate the effect of PVD im- shorter the vertical drainage length, the higher the vertical
provement. The embankment fill thickness was 3.5 m (includ- hydraulic conductivity, and the larger the well resistance
ing a 0.5-m sand mat) and filling speed was about 0.03 m/day. of PVD, the smaller the error will be.
The base and top dimensions were 71 ⫻ 71 m and 25 ⫻ 25 • The method was applied to analyze test embankments on
m, respectively. The PVDs were installed to around 25 m PVD-improved subsoils in China, Japan, and Thailand.
depth with a spacing of 1.5 m (square pattern). The improved All these cases, compared with the results of using the
zone was under the center of the embankment with an area of drainage elements method as well as measured data, in-
45 ⫻ 45 m. dicate that the proposed method yielded acceptable results
in terms of settlement, excess pore pressure, and lateral
Test Embankment on Bangkok Clay Deposit, Thailand displacement. It is recommended that the proposed simple
approximate method is a useful tool for engineering prac-
The test embankments on PVD improved subsoil at Nong tice.
Ngu Hao, Thailand, were reported by Bergado et al. (1997).
The embankment analyzed had base dimensions of 54 ⫻ 54 REFERENCES
m. After the fill thickness reached 1.5 m, a 7-m berm was Barron, R. A. (1948). ‘‘Consolidation of fine-grained soils by drain
added at four sides and the embankment was built to a final wells.’’ Trans. ASCE, 113, 718–742.
fill thickness of 4.2 m. The average filling speed was about Bergado, D. T., Balasubramaniam, A. S., Fannin, R. J., Anderson, L. R.,
0.02 m/day. The top dimension was 14.8 ⫻ 14.8 m. At the and Holtz, R. D. (1997). ‘‘Full scale field test of prefabricated vertical
test site, the soft clay deposit extends 12–15 m. For soft lay- drain (PVD) on soft Bangkok clay and subsiding environment.’’ Proc.,
ers, the compression index Cc is 0.8–2.0 and the water content Ground Improvement, Reinforcement, and Treatment Devel. 1987 to
1997, Geo-Logan 1997, Spec. Publ. No. 69, ASCE, New York, 372–
is 80–100%. The soft deposit is in a normally consolidated 393.
state except for the surface weathered crust. The groundwater Biot, M. A. (1941). ‘‘General theory of three dimensional consolidation.’’
level is about 1.0 m below the ground surface. The PVD im- J. Appl. Phys., 12, 155–164.
proved zone had a base width of 40 m. The PVDs were in- Carrillo, N. (1942). ‘‘Simple two and three dimensional cases in the the-
stalled in a square pattern to 12 m deep, with a spacing of 1.5 ory of consolidation of soils.’’ J. Math. Phys., 21, 1–5.
m. In this site, the hydraulic conductivity of the subsoil below Chai, J. C. (2001). ‘‘Linear ln(e ⫹ ec) ⬃ ln( p⬘) relation of structured
natural clay.’’ Proc., 15th Int. Conf. on Soil Mech. and Geotech. Engrg.,
12-m depths was low and one-way drainage was adopted for Vol. 1, Balkema, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
the PVD-improved zone. Chai, J. C., and Miura, N. (1999). ‘‘Investigation of factors affecting
For the above two cases, although the embankments were vertical drain behavior.’’ J. Geotech. and Geoenviron. Engrg., ASCE,
in a square pattern, on the centerline, a plain strain condition 125(3), 216–226.
was assumed and analyzed by 2D FEM. Chai, J. C., Miura, N., Sakajo, S., and Bergado, D. T. (1995). ‘‘Behavior
The FEM analysis results of settlements, excess pore pres- of vertical drain improved subsoil under embankment loading.’’ Soils
and Found., Tokyo, 35(4), 49–61.
sures, and lateral displacements using the proposed method as Hansbo, S. (1981). ‘‘Consolidation of fine-grained soils by prefabricated
well as the drainage elements method were compared together drains.’’ Proc., 10th Int. Conf. Soil Mech. and Found. Engrg., Vol. 3,
with field data. The tendencies are similar to those of Case 1, 677–682.
the test embankment at the HN expressway, China. Hird, C. C., Pyrah, I. C., and Russell, D. (1992). ‘‘Finite element mod-
The above three cases represent a wide range of natural clay elling of vertical drains beneath embankments on soft ground.’’ Géo-
deposits. The results of the proposed method compared well technique, London, 42(3), 499–511.
Hird, C. C., Pyrah, I. C., Russell, D., and Cinicioglu, F. (1995). ‘‘Mod-
with those of a more sophisticated method using drainage el- elling the effect of vertical drains in two-dimensional finite element
ements. Considering the potential errors involved in determin- analyses of embankments on soft ground.’’ Can. Geotech. J., Ottawa,
ing the soil parameters, the error introduced by the simple 32, 795–807.
method is not significant. The proposed method provides an Indraratna, B., Balasubramaniam, A. S., and Ratnayake, P. (1994). ‘‘Per-
easy way to analyze and predict the behavior of PVD-im- formance of embankment stabilized with vertical drains on soft clay.’’
proved subsoil. J. Geotech. Engrg., ASCE, 120(2), 257–273.
Malaysian Highway Authority (MHA). Proc., Int. Symp. on Trial Em-
bankments on Malaysian Marine Clays, Vol. 1, Kuala Lumpur, Malay-
CONCLUSIONS sia, 16/1–16/12.
Olson, R. (1998). ‘‘Settlement of embankments on soft clays.’’ J. Geo-
• A simple approximate method for analyzing PVD im- tech. and Geoenvir. Engrg., ASCE, 124(4), 278–288.
Roscoe, K. H., and Burland, J. B. (1968). ‘‘On the generalized stress-
proved subsoils is proposed in this paper. It represents the strain behavior of ‘wet’ clay.’’ Engineering plasticity, J. Heyman and
effect of vertical hydraulic conductivity of natural subsoil F. A. Leckie, eds., Cambrige University Press, Cambridge, U.K., 535–
and the effect of radial drainage due to PVD, by using an 609.
equivalent vertical hydraulic conductivity kve . With the Sekiguchi, H., Shibata, T., Fujimoto, A., and Yamaguchi, H. (1986). ‘‘A
proposed method, the analysis of PVD-improved subsoil macro-element approach to analyzing the plane strain behavior of soft
becomes the same as that for the unimproved case. foundation with vertical drains.’’ Proc., 31st Symp., JGS, Japanese Soil
Mechanics and Foundation Engineering Society, Tokyo, 111–116 (in
• It has been proved theoretically that, in terms of the av- Japanese).
erage degree of consolidation, in the case of one layer and Shen, S. L., Yang, C. W., Miura, N., and Chai, J. C. (2000). ‘‘Field
ignoring the vertical drainage of natural subsoil, the max- performance of PVD improved soft clay under embankment.’’ Coast.
imum error of the proposed method is 10% compared Geotech. Engrg. in Pract., A. Nakase and T. Tsuchida, eds., Vol. 1,
with Hansbo’s solution for PVD consolidation. For the Balkema, Rotterdam, 515–520.
cases of one layer or multilayers and considering both Taylor, D. W. (1948). Fundamentals of soil mechanics, Wiley, New York.
Wang, Z. M., Xu, L. X., and Jian, Z. H. (1998). ‘‘Field experimental
vertical and radial drainages with the parameters adopted study on the soft ground treatment of Hongzhou-Niingbo (HN) Ex-
here, the maximum error of the proposed method is 5%. pressway foundation.’’ Soft ground treatment in Hangzhou-Ningbo Ex-
The multilayer cases were analyzed by FEM, and the pressway, T. L. Cai, ed., Hongzhou Press, Hongzhou, 183–222 (in
FEM solutions using the proposed method are compared Chinese).