Faculty of Engineering Technology

Civil Engineering Department

Soil Laboratory

ENCE 311

Experiment #11

“Consolidation Test”

Instructors :

Dr. Abdelhamid Mimi, Eng. Shuroq AL Jamal

Done By Group C

` ANAS AKRAM 1160382

AYA KHALA 1171720

HANNA SAFAR 1172052

ANAS RABBA 1151890

AHMAD SAHEM 1160074

Section :2

Date of perform the experiment :14/11/2019

Date of submitting the experiment:16/12/2019

Contents
Introduction: ............................................................................................................................. 1
Background information: ......................................................................................................... 1
Hypothesis .............................................................................................................................. 4
Purpose: .............................................................................................................................. 4
Procedure: ................................................................................................................................. 5
Data and calculations ................................................................................................................ 6
Result and conclusion.............................................................................................................. 17
Reference: ................................................................................................................................ 19
Introduction:

Background information:

When a soil layer is subjected to vertical stress, volume change can take place through
rearrangement of soil grains, and some amount of grain fracture may also take place. The
volume of soil grains remains constant, so change in total volume is due to change in
volume of water. In saturated soils, this can happen only if water is pushed out of the voids.
The movement of water takes time and is controlled by the permeability of the soil and the
locations of free draining boundary surfaces. It is necessary to determine both the
magnitude of volume change (or the settlement) and the time required for the volume
change to occur. The magnitude of settlement is dependent on the magnitude of applied
stress, thickness of the soil layer, and the compressibility of the soil.

A stress increase caused by the construction of foundations or other loads compresses soil
layers. The compression is caused by deformation of soil particles, relocations of soil
particles, and expulsion of water or air from the void spaces. In general, the soil settlement
caused by loads may be divided into three broad categories:

• Elastic settlement or immediate settlement {Si}, which is caused by the elastic

deformation of dry soil and of moist and saturated soils without any change in the
moisture content. Elastic settlement calculations generally are based on equations
derived from the theory of elasticity.

• Primary consolidation settlement, which is the result of a volume change in

saturated cohesive soils because of expulsion of the water that occupies the void
spaces.

• Secondary consolidation settlement, which is observed in saturated cohesive soils

and is the result of the plastic adjustment of soil fabrics. It is an additional form of
compression that occurs at constant effective stress.
•

The total settlement of a foundation can then be given as:

ST=SC+SS+Se

1
Where:
S T = total settlement
Se = elastic settlement
Ss = secondary consolidation settlement
Sc = primary consolidation settlement

When a saturated soil is loaded an immediate increase in pore pressure occurs and a
hydraulic gradient is set up so that seepage flow takes place into surrounding soil. This
excess pore pressure dissipates as water drains from the soil (very quickly in coarse
soil and very slowly in fine soil)as water leaves the soil change in volume occurs, the
rate gradually diminishing until steady state condition are regained .this process is
called consolidation.

Fig(1)compaction due consolidation

Hv=H-Hs
Where
Hs= the height of solids.
Ws = dry weight of the specimen.
γw = unit weight of water.
Gs = specific gravity of soil solids.
A= area of the specimen.
H = initial height of the specimen.
H v = initial height of voids.

2
Reconsolidation Condition is the maximum effective vertical overburden stress that a
particular soil sample has sustained in the past.

1. Normally consolidated, whose present effective overburden pressure is the

maximum pressure that the soil was subjected to in the past.

2. Over consolidated, whose present effective overburden pressure is less than that
which theSoil experienced in the past. The maximum effective past pressure is
called the Reconsolidation pressure.

The consolidation test unit consists of a consolidation and a loading device. It’s usually
consists of a brass ring in which the soil specimen is placed. One porous stone is placed
at the top of the specimen and another porous tone at the bottom. The soil specimen in
the ring with the two porous stones is placed on a base plate. A plastic ring surrounding
the specimen fits into a groove on the base plate. Load is applied through a loading
head that is placed on the top porous stone.

Consolidation can be calculated by using these equations:

𝑀𝑎𝑠𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑤𝑒𝑡 𝑠𝑎𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑒−𝑀𝑎𝑠𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑑𝑟𝑦 𝑠𝑎𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑒

Water content (W %) =
𝑀𝑎𝑠𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑑𝑟𝑦 𝑠𝑎𝑚𝑝𝑙𝑒

𝑉𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑚𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑣𝑜𝑖𝑑𝑠
e0= 𝑉𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑚𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑜𝑙𝑖𝑑
𝐻𝑣
= … while the area is constant
𝐻𝑠

20−𝐻𝑠
= …. While the total height is 20 mm
𝐻𝑠

𝑊𝑠
Hs = × 1000 …. The factor 1000 to change to mm
𝐴 × ρs ×G.S

𝑇ℎ𝑒 𝑑𝑖𝑓𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑏𝑒𝑡𝑤𝑒𝑒𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑎𝑙 𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑙 𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑔
Δe=
𝐻𝑠

3
 𝐿𝑜𝑎𝑑 𝑖𝑛 ℎ𝑎𝑛𝑔𝑒𝑟 × 𝛾𝑤 × 𝑀𝑎𝑔𝑛𝑖𝑓𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑
P1 = × 1000 … the 1000 to convert to KPa
𝐴

There are some factors that affecting the rate of consolidation:

• Permeability: An increase in permeability of the consolidating soil would lead to

an increase in the rate of seepage flow, other factors remaining constant.
• Compressibility: A greater compressibility leads to a greater decrease in the void
space of the soil for a particular stress change. This means that a greater volume of
water must be expelled from the soil and this will require a longer time.
Consequently, a lower rate of consolidation will result.
• Layer Thickness: An increase in the layer thickness leads to a decrease in the total
head gradient during the stage of pore water expulsion. It also means an increase in
the volume of water to be expelled and both of these effects lead to a lower rate of
consolidation.
•
Time: Consolidation is related to the time since its time can be predicted. Sometimes
consolidation can take years. This is especially true in saturated clays because
their hydraulic conductivity is extremely low, and this causes the water to take an
exceptionally long time to drain out of the soil. While drainage is occurring, the pore
water pressure is greater than normal because it is carrying part of the applied stress (as
opposed to the soil particles).
Hypothesis
It is expected that for our sample may have variation results because we are not change or
Duplicate the load in correct way, that is mean we duplicate the load after two days and so on.

Purpose:
The aim of this experiment is to determine the behavior of soil sample under increasing
load with time, then measure the amount of settlement in the sample. Instruments

4
instrument
Consolidation tool

sample weights

Procedure:

1- A sample of soil was prepared for the test. As a metal ring with two porous stone

one at the top of the sample, and another at the bottom were prepared by the

instructor.

2- The sample must remain saturate by adding water (by the instructor).

3- The load was applied in the sample, and gauge readings were taken at different

times, which represent the settlement at each time.

4- The load was doubled in the next day, and gauge readings were also taken.

5- This process was repeated for seven days. (Loading

6- The weight of the sample and the ring was determined (final reading).

5
 Data and calculations

Table(1)experiment data

Area of spaceman cm2 40..4

mass of the ring(gm) 84.5
mass of wet sample +ring(initial) (gm) 228
mass of wet sample +ring(final)(gm) 196
mass of dry sample +ring(gm) 176
height (cm) 2
specific gravity 2.8
water content (wi%) 56.83060109
water content (wf%) 21.8579235

Table ( 2 ) settlements at different weights and times

Elapsed settlement settlement settlement settlement settlement settlement settlement

Time (min) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)

t √𝑡 1KG 2KG 4KG 8KG 16KG 32KG 64KG

0 0 10 8.5 7.65 6.5 5.2 4.1 2.9
0.25 0.5 9.7 8.41 7.57 6.4 5.1 4 2.84
1 1 9.64 8.36 7.53 6.36 5.06 3.95 2.8
2.25 1.5 9.58 8.31 7.49 6.32 5.02 3.9 2.76
4 2 9.52 8.26 7.45 6.27 4.98 3.85 2.72
6.25 2.5 9.46 8.21 7.41 6.23 4.94 3.8 2.68
9 3 9.4 8.16 7.37 6.19 4.9 3.75 2.64
12.25 3.5 9.34 8.11 7.33 6.14 4.86 3.7 2.6
16 4 9.28 8.06 7.29 6.09 4.82 3.65 2.56
20.25 4.5 9.22 8.01 7.25 6.04 4.78 3.6 2.52
25 5 9.16 7.97 7.21 5.99 4.73 3.55 2.48
36 6 9.06 7.9 7.12 5.9 4.65 3.46 2.4
49 7 8.97 7.85 7.04 5.8 4.58 3.38 2.33
64 8 8.9 7.82 6.97 5.71 4.52 3.3 2.28
169 13 8.7 7.73 6.75 5.45 4.32 3.1 2.14
289 17 8.62 7.7 6.65 5.35 4.23 3.02 2.08
625 25 8.55 7.67 6.56 5.25 4.15 2.95 2.03
900 30 8.52 7.66 6.53 5.22 4.12 2.92 2.01
1444 38 8.5 7.65 6.5 5.2 4.1 2.9 2

6
 FIG( 1 ) relatin between settelment and square root

1Kg
10.5

settlement(mm)
10

9.5

8.5

7.5
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
√𝑡(min

FIG(2 ) relatin between settelment and time

1kg
9.8
9.6
settelment (mm)

9.4
9.2
9
8.8
8.6
8.4
8.2
0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000

time (min)

7
 FIG( 3 ) relatin between settelment and square root of time

2kg
8.6

8.4

8.2
settlement(mm)

7.8

7.6

7.4

7.2

7
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
√𝑡(min

FIG( 4 ) relatin between settelment and time

2kg
8.6

8.4
settelment (mm

8.2

7.8

7.6

7.4
0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Axis Title

8
 FIG( 5 ) relatin between settelment and square root of time

4kg
7.8
7.6
settlement(mm)
7.4
7.2
7
6.8
6.6
6.4
6.2
6
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
√𝑡(min)

FIG(6 ) relatin between settelment and time

4kg
7.8
7.6
7.4
settelment (mm

7.2
7
6.8
6.6
6.4
6.2
0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Axis Title

9
 FIG(7 ) relatin between settelment and square root of time

8kg
7

6.5
settlement(mm)

5.5

4.5
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
√𝑡(min)

FIG( 8 ) relatin between settelment and time

8kg
6.6
6.4
6.2
settelment (mm

6
5.8
5.6
5.4
5.2
5
4.8
0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000

Time(min)

10
 FIG( 9 ) relatin between settelment and square root of time

16kg
5.3
5.1
settlement(mm)

4.9
4.7
4.5
4.3
4.1
3.9
3.7
3.5
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
√𝑡(min)

FIG( 10 ) relatin between settelment and time

16kg
5.3
5.1
4.9
settelment (mm

4.7
4.5
4.3
4.1
3.9
3.7
3.5
0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Time(min)

11
 FIG( 11 ) relatin between settelment and square root of time

32kg
4.3
4.1
3.9
settlement(mm)

3.7
3.5
3.3
3.1
2.9
2.7
2.5
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
√𝑡(min)

FIG(12) relatin between settelment and square root of time

32kg
4.1
3.9
3.7
settelment (mm

3.5
3.3
3.1
2.9
2.7
2.5
0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Time(min)

12
 FIG( 13 ) relatin between settelment and square root of time

64kg
3.1
2.9
2.7
settlement(mm)

2.5
2.3
2.1
1.9
1.7
1.5
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
√𝑡(min)

FIG( 14 ) relatin between settelment and time

64kg
3.1
2.9
2.7
settelment (mm

2.5
2.3
2.1
1.9
1.7
1.5
0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
Time(min)

13
 Table (3) needed data to calculate cv

Tv50 0.19635

Tv90 0.848

Ws(gm) 91.5

HS (mm) 8.161624

e0 1.450493

Table (4) calculate stress and void ratio

diff of first
load
t50 t90 cv90 cv50 and last Δe void ratio stress (kpa)
kg
read

1 81 30 2.826667 0.242407 1.5 0.183787 e1 1.266706 26.95054945

2 32.14 15 5.653333 0.610921 0.85 0.104146 e2 1.16256 53.9010989

4 100 40 2.12 0.19635 1.15 0.140903 e3 1.021657 107.8021978

8 106.09 36.67 2.312517 0.185079 1.3 0.159282 e4 0.862375 215.6043956

16 69.439 46.7 1.815846 0.282766 1.1 0.134777 e5 0.727598 404.2582418

32 72.25 40 2.12 0.271765 1.2 0.14703 e6 0.580568 808.5164835

64 75.167 30 2.826667 0.261218 0.9 0.110272 e7 0.470296 1347.527473

Sample calculation
20 − 8.161624
𝐻𝑆 = = 1.4505
8.161624

91.4
𝐻𝑆 = ∗ 1000 = 8.1616𝑚𝑚
4003.9 ∗ 1 ∗ 2.8

14
 𝑇50∗𝐻𝑑𝑟^^2 0.19635∗20^2
𝐶𝑣50 = 4∗𝑡90
= 4∗30
=0.24241

diffrence 1.5
Δe = = = 0.183787
𝐻𝑆 8.1616

𝑒1 = 𝑒0 − Δe = 1.45 − 0.183787 =1.266706

𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 𝑖𝑛 ℎ𝑎𝑛𝑔𝑒𝑟 ∗ 𝑝𝑤 ∗ 𝑚𝑎𝑔𝑛𝑖𝑓𝑖𝑐 𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 9.81 ∗ 11 ∗ 1

𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑠 = ∗ 1000 = ∗ 1000 = 26.95𝑘𝑝𝑎
𝐴 40.4

1.5

1.3

1.1

0.9
void ratio

0.7

0.5

0.3

0.1

-0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000

stress kpa

FIG( 15 ) relatin between void ratio and stress

Pc=61kpa

15
 1.5

1.3

1.1

void ratio 0.9

0.7

0.5

0.3

0.1

-0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000

stress mpa

FIG( 16 ) relatin between void ratio and stress

P0=100kpa

1.5

1.3

1.1

0.9
void ratio

0.7

0.5

0.3

0.1

-0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000

stress mpa

FIG( 17 ) relatin between void ratio and stress

16
 Δe 0.9 − 1.1
𝐶𝑐 = = = 0.78
Δ𝑙𝑜𝑔p 𝑙𝑜𝑔380 − 𝑙𝑜𝑔210

Result and conclusion

Results:
Table (5) results
Load(kg) t50 t90 Cv50 Cv90
1 81 30 2.826667 0.242407
2 32.14 15 5.653333 0.610921
4 100 40 2.312517 0.19635
8 106.09 36.67 2.12 0.185079
16 69.439 46.7 1.815846 0.282766
32 72.52 40 2.12 0.271765
64 75.167 30 2.826667 0.261218

Pc= 61kap
P0=100 kpa
Cc=0.78
Where;
Pc= pre consolidation settlement.
Cc= compression index.
t50= time for 50% primary consolidation.
t90= time for 90% primary consolidation.

17
Conclusion:

The figure shows the coefficients of consolidation obtained from the first and second
methods for each stage of loading.

As noticed from the results above, the results of the coefficients of consolidation varied

between the two methods because each one has a different procedure and the relationship

between the stress applied to the soil and the void ratio is inversely-curvilinear which

makes sense; because as the load increases, the soil is more compacted and so less void

ratio remains. Also, these variations are caused by a lot of errors that could have occurred

during the loading process such as:

• Removing the first load and adding the other not directly but after a long time

(sometimes days), which highly affects the settlement readings.

• Errors in reading the dial gauge .

• During one stage of loading the load was dropped on the floor by other groups

which affected the readings after this incident.

• Human errors in plotting and drawing tangents to the various relationships drawn

above, which affected the value of the coefficients of consolidation directly.

18
Reference:

• Das, Braja M., Principles of Geotechnical Engineering, 7th edition.

• Das, Braja M., Soil Mechanics Laboratory Manual, 6th edition, University of

California State, 2002 print.

• Das, B. M. (2006). Principles of geotechnical engineering. Stamford,CT:

Thomson Learning College.

19