GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING AN ENGINEERING MANUAL FOR SETTLEMENT STUDIES by J. M. DUNCAN and A. L. BUCHIGNANI JUNE, 1976 DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA - BERKELEY7A FO Ss Dae 1446 AN ENGINEERING MANUAL FOR SETTLEMENT STUDIES by 3. mM Doncan ft . and L I R ’ ~ov APL, Buchignani RA R y APR 2 0 1066 UNIVER ry, - iON aune, 1976 APG [0622 1STABLE OF CCNTENTS INTRODUCTION SETTLEMENT SETTLEMENT PROBLEMS SETTLEMENT OF FOOTINGS ON SAND Estimating Settlement Bases on Standard Penetration Test Data Estimating Settlement Based on Cone Penetration Test Data IMMEDIATE SETTLEMENT OF FOUNDATIONS ON CLAY CONSOLIDATION SETTLEMENT OF FOUNDATIONS AND FILLS ON CLAY SECONDARY COMPRESSION IN CLAYS STRESS DISTRIBUTION SETTLEMENT OF PILE FOUNDATIONS METHODS OF ELIMINATING, REDUCING, OR COPING WITH SETTLEMENT REFERENCES un u ua 22 29 72 79 88 92INTRODUCTION The purpose of this manual is to provide a simple, practical guide for settlement studies. It is concerned with (1) settlement problems and building damage due to settlement, (2/ methods of estimating settlements of shallow foundations on sand, (3) methods of estimating immediate, consolidation, and secondary compression settlements of shallow founda- tions on clay, (4) methods of estimating settlements of pile foundations, and (5) methods of eliminating, reducing, or coping with settlements. ‘The emphasis of this manual is on simple, routine procedures. It does not include advanced analysis procedures, nor does it deal with spec~ jalized problems such as settlements due to vibrations or wetting of collapsible soils. References are yiven to the sources of the material contained in the manual, to provide avenues for studies going beyond the scope of this manualSETTLEMENT Settlement of buildings and fills may result from a number of causes, as described in Table 1. The principal emphasis of this manual is on methods of estimating settlement due to compression of foundation soils. It 4s important to note that there are a number of other possible causes of settlements, which, in particular cases, may be more important than compression of foundation soils under increased static loads.TABLE 1. - CAUSES OF SETTLEMENT cause Comment Compression of foundation soils under static loads. Soft, normally consolidated clays and peaty soils are most compressible. Loose silts, sands, and gravels are also quite compressible. Compression of soft clays due to lowering ground- water table. Increased effective stress causes settlement with no increase in surface load. Compression of cohesionless soils due to vibrations. Loose sands and gravels are most sus- ceptible. Settlement can be caused by machine vibrations, earthquakes, and blasts. Compression of foundation soils due to wetting. Loose silty sands and yravels are most susceptible. Settlements can be caused by rise in groundwater table or by infiltration. Shrinkage of cohesive soils caused by drying. Highly plastic clays are most suscept~ ible. Increase in temperature under buildings containing ovens or furnaces may accelerate drying. Wetting of highly plastic clays can cause swell- ing and heave of foundations. Loss of foundation support due to erosion. Waterfront foundations must extend below maximum erosion depth. Loss of foundation support due to excavation of adjacent ground. Most pronounced in soft, saturated clays. Loss of support due to lateral shifting of the adjacent ground. Lateral shifting may result from land~ slides, slow downhill creep, or move ment of retaining structures.TABLE 1.-- (Continued) cause Comment, Loss of support due to formation of sinkhole. Soils overlying cavernous limestone and broken conduits are susceptible. Loss of support due to thaw- ing of permafrost. Permafrost should be insulated from foundation heat. Loss of support due to partial or complete lique- faction. Loose, saturated sands are most susceptible. Downdrag on piles driven through soft clay. Loading on piles is increased by negative skin friction if soil around upper part of pile settles.SETTLEMENT PROBLEMS For purposes of considering the problems caused by settlement, it is useful to consider two aspects of settlement which may be defined as follows Total settlement is the magnitude of the downward movement of a struc~ ture or fill. Differential settlement is the difference between the settlements at two different locations. Differential settlement causes distortion of a structure, In general, therefore, a structure can tolerate a larger settlement if the settle~ ment is uniform or nearly uniform, than if the settlement varies from place to place. pifferential settlement can have a number of undesirable results: (1) Tilting of a structure is unsightly even if it does not impair its usefulness. A tilt of 1/250 can be distinguished by the unaided eye. (2) Moderate differential settlement can cause cracking and other forms of architectural damage to a structure. with increasing differen- tial settlement, doors and windows may become so distorted that they do not open and close properly. Larger amounts of differential settlement may cause floors and stairways to become uneven and treacherous, and can cause windows to shatter. At this point, the usefulness of the building has been seriously impaired.(3) Severe differential settlement may eventually result in such wide- spread cracking of a structure that its structural integrity is im paired, and it may be more susceptible to collapse during an earth- quake. (4) Tf a structure settles relative to the surrounding ground, or the ground settles relative to the structure, entryways may be dis~ rupted, and utility lines may be damaged where they enter the structure. . Even if settlements are uniform or nearly uniform, large total settle~ ments can also result in problems: (1) Settlement of sites located near a river, a lake, or an ocean may result in increased likelihood of flooding during periods of high water. (2) Large settlements may disrupt surface drainage. If water ponds around and beneath structures, they may become inaccessible at times land subject to damage due to milcew and wood rot. Experience with building settlement provides a basis for estimating the magnitudes of differential settlement which will cause cracking of archi- tectural finishes such as plaster, stucco, and brick facing. Skempton and MacDonald (1956) and Polshin and Tokar (1957) surveyed a large number of cases of building damage caused by settlement, and recommended limits of the amounts of settlement that buildings can tolerate without cracking. The best measure of limiting settlement was found to be angular distortion, which is defined in the sketch on Table 2.TABLE 2.-- VALUES OF ANGULAR DISTORTION (6/2) WHICH CAN BE TOLERATED WITHOUT CRACKING. (After Skempton and MacDonald, 1956, Polshin and Tokar, 1957, and NAVDOCKS, 1971) Irregular Settlement Regular Settlement tai Allowable ‘Type of Building La 7a Steel frame with flexible siding 0.008 Stee or reinforced concrete frame aa with insensitive finish such as dry - toca wall, glass, or moveable panels ° Steel or reinforced concrete frame 25 0.002 with brick, block, plaster, or stucco finish 3 0.001 0.0008, Load-bearing brick, tile, or kad poe concrete block walls 3 Sao Circular steel tanks on flexible ~ 008 base, with fixed top ° Cixcular steel tanks on flexible 0.002 to base, with floating top 0.003 Tall slender structures such as stacks, silos, and water tanks, -- 0.002 with rigid mat foundations ' 'when the settlement profile is erratic, as it often is for buildings on sand, compacted fill, and stiff clay, the maximum angular distortion can occur anywhere in the building. Tae magnitude of the angular dis- tortion for buildings on isolated footings can be estimated by assuming that the minimum settlement of any column will be one-fourth of the estimated maximum settlement, and that these extreme values will occur at adjacent columns. when the settlement profile is more regular, as is often the case for puildings built over soft clays, the naximum angular distortion may be estimated from the calculated settlements. For the dish-shaped type of settlement profile shown in the sketch on Table 2, the maximum angular distortion occurs at the corner of the building. Architectural finishes are usually installed after a portion of the settlement’ has already occurred, and are only subject to damage by settlements which occur after they are installed. The values shown in Table 2 are based on field surveys of damage, however, and refer to the entire settlement of the building rather than that which occurs subse~ quent to installation of the architectural finishes. Tf an unusually large portion of the settlement takes place before the finish is in- stalled, larger angular distortions can be tolerated without cracking. the amount of angular distortion which occurs as a result of settlement of a building is determined by the uniformity of the foundation soils, the stiffness of the building and its foundation, and the distribution of joad within the building. In conventional settlement analyses of the type described in this manual, the stiffnesses of the building andfoundation are not considered in calculating settlements. It is useful, therefore, to have correlations of the type shown in Table 3, which may be used to estimate the probable angular distortion based on the caleu- lated maximum settlement. For example, if the maximum calculated settlement of a building to be founded on a mat on sand is 1.5 inches, the maximum angular distortion would be estimated to be 1.5/750, or 0.002.Lo TABLE 3.-- EMPIRICAL CORRELATIONS BETWEEN MAXIMUM SETTLEMENT (A) AND ANGULAR DISTORTION (8/2) ‘Type of Foundation Approximate value of 6/L for 4 = 1 inch* Mats on sand Rectangular mats on varved silt Square mats on varved silt Mats on clay Spread footings on sand Spread footings on varved silt Spread footings on clay 1/750 1/1000 to 1/2000 1/2000 to 1/3000 1/1250 1/600 1/600 1/1000 45/4 increases roughly in proportion with A, For 4 = 2 inches, values of 6/2 would be about twice as large as shown, for A= 3 inches, three times as large, etc. Data from Gould and Parsons (1975), and Skempton and MacDonald (1956).SETTLEMENT OF FOOTINGS ON SAND when a footing on sand is loaded, it settles immediately due to volume change and distortion in the sand beneath the footing. These immediate settlements, which are denoted by 0,, can be estimated using Standard Penetration Test or Cone Penetration Test data. Following the period of initial settlement, the footing continues to settle a small amount at a rate which decreases with time. This con~ tinuing settlement may be estimated using simple empirical relationships. Estimating Settlement Bases on Standard Penetration Test Data Based on correlations of measured settlements with Standard Penetration Test blow counts, Terzaghi and Peck (1967), Peck, Hansen and Thornburn (1974) and Meyerhof£ (1965) have suggested various empirical relation- ships for estimating settlement. The simple relationship suggested by Meyerhoff has been found to be as accurate as any other. Comparisons of measured and predicted settlements for a number of cases showed that Meyerhofé's procedure predicted settlements which varied from 0.9 times the actual settlement to 7 times the actual settlement. This relation- ship, therefore, can be used to estimate the upper limit of possible settlement for a given footing. The relationship between settlement, bearing pressure, blow count and footing size suggested by Meyerhoff can be expressed by the following equation. 5 Ww 1.5) GS a in which pj = maximum value of immediate settlement - inches Wwp = bearing pressure - tons/ft? N = minimum average Standard Penetration Test* Cl width correction, from Table 4. The minimum average blow count is calculated in two steps. First, the blow counts for each boring are averaced over the depth from the base of the footing to a depth B (B = footing width) below the base. Then the minimum average value for any boring is chosen for use in equation (1). Tf the sand is silty, and below the water table, and the blow count is greater than 15, a corrected blow count should be used in equation (1). This corrected blow count (N') is calculated using the following equation 15 + 0.5 (v- 15) >) A footing on sand should have a factor of safety against bearing capacity failure which is at least 2.5. If the factor of safety is smaller, additional settlement will occur due to shearing deformations in the sand below the footing. For a group of footings on sand, settlements will vary from footing to footing as a result of variations in the sand density. The minimum probable settlement may be estimated to be about one-fourth of the value given by equation (1). ‘The magnitudes of the settlements after various periods of time may be estimated using the following equaticn ay = number of blows of a 140 lb hamer, falling 30 inches, required to rive a standard sampler (1.42 in I.D., 2.00 in 0.D.) one foot. The sampler is driven 18 inches, and blows are counted for the last 12 inches.13 TABLE 4 WIDTH CORRECTION FACTOR, C, Footing wiath 3 att 1.00 ot 0.95 ett 0.90 10 #t o.as pia se 0.80ey in which , = settlement after a period of time (inches) immediate settlement (inches) = time rate factor (dimensionless) from Table 5. An example of the use of Standar@ Penetration Test data for estimating settlements is given in Fig. 1. Estimating Settlement Based on Cone Penetration Test Pata When the required data are available, settlement of footings on sand may be estimated somewhat nore accurately using Cone Penetration Test data than using Standard Penetration Test data. Cone Penetration Test results are less subject to variations due to extraneous factors, and correlate somewhat better with measured settlements than do Standard Penetration Test results. ‘The Cone Penetration Test is performed by pushing a penetrometer with a conical point, and an area of 10 cm®, into the sand at a constant, slow rate of penetration. The resistance is measured continually with depth. Schmertmann (1970) has suggested a simple procedure for using cone pene- tration test data to estimate footing settlement. The settlement is cal- culated using the equation Le wL(Z Be apd (<2) az “4 Pp 7 2S AP cs in which 9, = immediate settlement (the units of p, are the same as the units of dz)RATE FACTOR, ¢, t Time 7 1 month 1.0 4 months Lt 1 year 1.2 3 years 1.3 10 years 1.4 30 years 1ses = a ° 3 2 z z 4 300 kins +150 tons Se gn &n BN ° |e i \- B TL Square Footing ss 7 ined Cs Ir ~ ott Average N- Mt 21 | | \7 values within 7 2 | this range of 18 | 4 a depth 15 15 a p25 20) 9 22 eo 25 | ee Average values of N between depths of 5 ft. and [5 ft. + Boring | No = 21 Boring2 N, = 24 Boring 3 Ng 7 194—Minimum value Correct for silty sand below water table Nye =!5 +0.5(19-15) #17 Estimate maximum settlement p »—22 p= 82 = 1.5 t/t? i TN=18) Cg aa ea (5).5) = 0.6 inches A = T7-15)0.85) Estimate minimum settlement ~ 7 Prin = > Prax, = 0:15 inches Estimate settlement after 10 years P = (0.6) (1.4) = 0.8 inches Fig. | EXAMPLE: ESTIMATING SETTLEMENT OF A FOOTING IN SAND USING STANDARD PENETRATION TEST DATAa7 correction factor for initial pressure at foundation level (dimensionless) from Table 6 bp = p - p, = net bearing pressure at foundation Level (Ap should be expressed in the same units as 4.) initial effective overburden pressure at foundation level p = bearing pressure settlement influence factor (dimensionless) from Fig. 2 q. = cone penetration resistance (expressed in same units as Ap) thickness of sublayer (expressed in same units as 0). qo use this procedure, the sand beneath the footing is divided into a number of sublayers. Within each sublayer the cone penetration resistance should be essentially constant. The value of I, at the center of each sublayer is determined from Fig. Because I, has a peak value at z= 0.58, it is necessary to choose the sublayers so that one sublayer boundary falls at this depth, Then I) will vary linearly within each sublayer, and the value of I, at the center will be the average for each sublayer. a, is approximately constant from the base of the footing to a depth of 2B beneath the base, it is not necessary to subdivide the depth. In this case the settlement can be calculated using the following equation 6) in which B = footing width (expressed in the same units as 0,) and the other terms are as defined previously.TABLE 6 PRESSURE CHANGE CORRECTION FACTOR, C, Po ® °p ° 1.0 0.2 0.9 0.4 0.8 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.6 P10 0.5 181s ool 02 03 04 05 06 DEPTH RATIO 2.0 | Z= DEPTH BELOW FOOTING BOTTOM B= FOOTING WIDTH Fig. 2 SETTLEMENT INFLUENCE FACTOR, 1, , FOR ESTIMATING SETTLEMENTS USING CONE PENETRATION TEST DATAThe magnitudes of the settlements after various periods of time may be estimated using equation (3). An example of the use of Cone Penetration test data for estimating settlements is given in Fig. 3. 20. ee ag ka /em®™ 300 kips = 190 200 300 5 pe me Olen F ; | | Square 5 | | | Footing Lo ft. of | LAL | Lott | = isd | | x i | | Feoqd | | | | 8 | 25 | | | | 1 kg Zem? 1 / 1% sd |] lil Sublayer| Depth- ft] AZ-ft Aver? Se) 1, ane (8/4) \ 5-10 | 5 130 | 0.3 0. O15 2 10-15 | 5 100 | 0.5 0.0250 3 15-25 | 10 240 | 02 0.0083 Ds 0.0448 Determine Cp: Assume Tm = 10 Ib/ft?, p = 5(110)= 550 psf =0.27 t/ft® Assume weight of footing and backfill is same as weight of sand excavated. Ap = 38 = 15 rst? 0.27. i B/AP =--BE=0.18 Cp = 0.91 Immediate settlement © D.=1/2)(0.91) (1.5) (0.0448) = 0.03 ft Settlement after 10 years P =(0,03)(1.4) = 0.04 ft. Fig. 3. EXAMPLE: ESTIMATING SETTLEMENT OF A FOOTING ON SAND USING CONE PENETRATION TEST DATA22 IMMEDIATE SETTLEMENT OF FOUNDATIONS ON CLAY When ‘a load is applied over a Limited area on clay, some settlement occurs immediately. This immediate settlement (p,) has two components: (1) In both saturated and unsaturated clays, some immediate settlement occurs as a result of distortion, or change of shape of the clay beneath the loaded area, (2) In unsaturated clays, immediate volume change also con- tributes to immediate settlement. In saturated clays, however, there is no immediate volume change, because time is required for water to drain from the clay. Immediate settlement can be estimated using elastic theory, by means of the charts shown in Fig. 4 which were developed by Janbu, Bjerrum, and Kjaernsli (1971). These charts give values of the influence coefficients I, and I, which are used to es mate the immediate settlement by means of the following equation By? o, 7 Tot, Ba-v (6) in which p, = average value of immediate settlement for a flexible loaded area, The units of p, are the same as the units of B. Ig and I, q = average bearing pressure. This is the net load of the dimensionless settlement factors from Fig. 4. puilding divided by the building area. Fig. 4 may also be used to estimate the immediate settlement of isolated foot- ings, in which case q is the net footing load divided by the footing area. B = width of building, or footing. Same units as 0+23 FACTOR Ty oof as 1 2 § 10 20 50 100 1,000 RATIO H/8 1 1 1 a9 + tT oe T i 100. 7 art ee RESO {0 “ I | os Ce = gaa os tS 18 20 8 Oe reso Ratio 0/3 FACTOR To p, +b SB a-v?) P, = IMMEDIATE SETTLEMENT (AVERAGE VALUE) = AVERAGE BEARING PRESSURE FOUNDATION WIDTH YOUNG'S MODULUS OF FOUNDATION SOIL POISSON'S RATIO OF FOUNDATION SOIL I$ 1, = FACTORS FROM CHART ABOVE 0 q B E v 0 Fig. 4 CHART FOR ESTIMATING IMMEDIATE SETTLEMENTS OF FOUNDATIONS ON CLAY (FROM JANBU, BJERRUM AND KJAERNSLI, 1956)i | | L : | 24 = undrained modulus of clay. E should be expressed in the same units as q. y= Poisson's ratio of clay (dimensionless). ‘he settlement of the corner, the edge and the center of the loaded area may be estimated using the coefficients shown in Table 7. This table also contains coefficients which may be used to estimate the settlements of rigid footings. ‘The accuracy with which the immediate settlement can be estimated is governed by the accuracy with the modulus of the clay can be estimated. values of undrained modulus determined from the slopes of stress-strain curves from unconsolidated-undrained laboratory compression tests are frequently only half or one-third as large as the in-situ modulus. This aiggerence is due to disturbance effects, and the disparity may be even more significant if the amount of disturbance is unusually large. The chart shown in Fig. 5 may be used to estimate the undrained modulus of the clay based on its undrained shear strength, Plasticity Index and overconsolidation ratio. The values of the factor K in Fig. 5 have been determined from field measurements, and are therefore not affected by disturbance. The value of Poisson's ratio is equal to 0.5 for saturated clays. For partly saturated clays, the value of v can be assumed to be 0.3 without introducing significant inaccuracy in the estimated value of immediate settlement. ep soo Bae‘TABLE 7. IMMEDIATE SETTLEMENT APPROXIMATE RATIOS OF INMEDIATE SETTLEMENTS AT THE CORNER, THE CENTER, AND THE EDGE TO THE AVERAGE 25 H/L = @ 0.6 0.9 1.2 H/L = 1 0.5 0.7 1.3 H/L = 1/4 0.4 0.7 1.3 Rigid Flexible Loaded Area pesca Foundation ° ° 0 Depth corner | Podge ‘center rigid Paverage Paverage Paverage Paverage [neem ener pe 0.9 0.8 0.8i600 1400 1200 1000 t se 3 5 6 7 850 OVERCONSOLIDATION RATIO = KSy e UNDRAINED MODULUS OF CLAY € = FACTOR FROM CHART ABOVE oxrzAmm “ «= ~UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH OF CLAY Fig. 5 CHART FOR ESTIMATING UNDRAINED MODULUS OF CLAY27 An example of the use of these procedures for calculating immediate settlement is shown in Fig. 6. If the base of the foundation is above the top of the clay layer, the immediate settlement can be estimated in two steps. First, calculate the settlement for the case in which the thickness of the clay layer is increased so that it extends up to the base of the foundation. Second, calculate the settlement for the layer of clay added in the previous case, i.e., calculate the settlement for a clay layer extending from the base of the foundation to the top of the actual clay layer. Subtracting the second value of settlement from the first will provide an estimate of the actual immediate settlement.28 L =100 ft Weight of building = 8000,000 Ibs 9 P1240 OCR=2 Saturated Clay #120 Ib/tt? Average values $42 1000 Ib/ ft? Flexible Foundation 50 ft Weight of soil excavated (120)(5) (50) (100) = 3,000,000 Ib Net load = 8,000,000 Ib - 3,000,0001b = 5,000,000 Ib q = net load /area= 5,000,000 /5000 = 1,000 psf From Fig.4: for L/B=2, H/B=I, D/B=0.I 70.98, 1 =0.51 From Fig.5: for Plz 40, OCR=2 K=400 E=400-S, = (400) (1000) = 400,000 psf y=0.5 for saturated clay - (1000)( 50) 2 p, = (0.98) (0.51) ~agq,o00 ¢1- (0-5)") px 0.05 ft From Table 7: for H/L = 1/2 Pcorner * (0.4)(0.05) = 0.02 ft Pedge = (0.7) (0.05) = 0.035 ft Pcenter = (1.3) (0.05) = 0.065ft Fig. 6 EXAMPLE: CALCULATION OF IMMEDIATE SETTLEMENT29 CONSOLIDATION SETTLEMENT OF FOUNDATIONS AND FILLS ON CLAY ‘he amount and rate of settlement due to consolidation of clay can be estimated using the procedures described in this section if the loads and site conditions are known, and if data from laboratory consolida- tion tests on the clay are available. It is essential that the labora- tory tests be performed on high-quality undisturbed specimens. If the consolidation test specimens are disturbed during sampling, transporta- tion, or testing, the preconsolidation pressures may be obscured and the e-log p curve of the clay may be changed considerably, as shown in Fig. 7. Data from tests on specimens which appear to be disturbed should not be used in estimating settlements. Bach consolidation test produces data which may be used to plot an e-log p curve as shown in Fig. 7, and one or more compression-time curves as shown in Fig. 8. ‘These data may be used to estimate the amount and the rate of consolidation settlements using the following procedures (1) For each specimen, determine the preconsolidation pressure, Pp, using the Casagrande procedure, which is illustrated in Fig. 9: (a) Locate the point of sharpest curvature on the e-log Pp curve. (>) From this point, draw a horizontal line and a tangent to the curve. (c) Bisect the angle formed by these two lines. (a) Extend the virgin curve backward to intersect the bisector. ‘The point of intersection determines the preconsolidation pressure, as shown in Fig. 9.30 Undisturbed Specimen Disturbed VoID Specimen RATIO LOG PRESSURE = LOG p Fig. 7 @- LOG p CURVESDIAL READING LOG TIME = LOG ft Fig. 8 LABORATORY TIME CURVEVOID RATIO e (d) backward extension of virgin curve = preconsolidation > pressure (b) horizontal (c) bisector (a) sharpest curvature LOG PRESSURE =LOG p Fig.9 PROCEDURE FOR DETERMINING PRECONSOLIDATION PRESSURE USING @ - LOG p CURVE33 Determining the point of sharpest curvature requires care and some judg- ment. Sometimes it is best to estimate two positions of this point--one as far to the left as possible and the other as far to the right as possible, consistent with the data, and to repeat the construction for both cases. This will result in a range of preconsolidation pressures. Because the determination of p, involves some inevitable inaccuracy, knowing the range of possible values is more useful than a single estimate which falls somewhere in the possible range. The higher the quality of the test specimen, the smaller is the range of possible p, values. Although it is conventional to plot the compression curves from consoli- dation tests in the form of e-log p curves as shown in Fig. 9, this is not necessary, and it is easier to plot the curves in the form of €,- log Pp curves as shown in Fig. 10, To calculate the void ratio, the dry weight and specific gravity of the test specimen must be known. The value of €. can be calculated without knowing these quantities, since €, is defined by the following equation (7) in which AH = change in thickness of test specimen or clay layer H. = initial thickness of test specimen or clay layer~ The change in thickness of the test specimen can be determined directly from the dial gage readings, and the initial thickness is determined when the test is set up. Thus €, is easy to calculate, and the &,- log P curve is often preferred over the e-log p curve for purposes of settle~ ment calculations. Both procedures, if done properly, give the same amount of settlement.