INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR NUMERICAL AND ANALYTICAL METHODS IN GEOMECHANICS. VOL. 5 .

405-428 119Rll

THE CONSOLIDATION OF A SOIL STRATUM,

INCLUDING SELF-WEIGHT EFFECTS AND
LARGE STRAINS
KUANTSAI LEE AND G. C. SILLS
Departmeni of Engineering Science, Universiiy of Oxford, Parks Road, Oxford, England

SUMMARY
A layer of fill deposited in a soft wet condition will consolidate under its own weight and will commonly
undergo comparatively large strains in the process. Neither of these aspects of behaviour can be modelled
by traditional consolidation theories. In this paper, a consolidation model is developed from the theory
proposed by Gibson et al.' and is applied here to soil consolidation during and after soil deposition. No
restriction is made on the magnitude of strain, so that the boundaries are not taken as being fixed in space,
but are allowed to move as required by the process of consolidation. However, perhaps the more important ,

aspect is the consideration of self-weight, since in many instances, the surface loading applied to soft soils is
small, and the majority of the compression of the layer occurs while the effective stresses reach equilibrium
with the weight of the soil. Although some idealizations have to be made in assuming relationships between
-
soil parameters, it is shown that the self weight effects in consolidation can be significant, and fundamental
to an understanding of soft soil behaviour.

1. INTRODUCTION
When a load is applied to soil, local excess pore pressures are set up. These pressures dissipate as
the pore water drains, and the soil framework undergoes displacements, in a process of soil
consolidation. The magnitude of movements will be determined by the stress-strain response of
the soil, while the time-scale depends largely on the permeability.
An understanding of soil consolidation is fundamental in many civil engineering applications.
The first theoretical model was developed by Terzaghi'* for one-dimensional flow and settle-
ment, and extended by Rendulic" to three dimensions. Biot' proposed an elastic soil skeleton.
These models share the assumptions of infinitesimal strains, constant soil parameters and linear
stress-strain relationships, but, despite these restrictions, have provided a basis for much
foundation design. Indeed, there are soils and loading conditions where these simple theories
are still appropriate. However, there has been a recent growth of interest in the development of
more sophisticated models, allowing such possibilities as finite strains, soil parameters that vary
with stress-level, position and time, and non-linear stress-strain relationships to govern soil
behaviour. Relevant publications include McNabb,' Davis and R a y m ~ n dGibson ,~ et al.,' Berry
and Poskitt,' Small e f al.," Olson and Ladd,' Carter et d 3and Lee and Sills.'
Much of this work has applications to the consolidation of soft soils, where displacements can
be comparatively large, with considerable error in the assumption of infinitesimal strain.
However, these applications can be extended if the soil consolidation due to self-weight can also
be included in the theory. Certainly, in many field situations, such as deposition, the mass of the
soil itself provides the loading, and should, therefore, be considered. In this paper, therefore, a
large-strain consolidation theory is developed, following Gibson et al.' but with the inclusion of

0363-9061/81/040405-24$02.40 Received 31 May 1980

@ 1981 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Revised 18 September 1980
406 K. LEE AND G. C. SILLS

self-weight. It will be seen that, with certain assumptions about the form of the soil parameters,
also made by previous authors, and analytical solution is obtained for the one-dimensional case
of a soil layer, consolidating either under its own weight, or due to an additional external
loading, or for the case of a layer formed by steady deposition. In the first and last cases, the
inclusion of self-weight is, of course, essential. The assumptions concerning the soil parameters
can, if necessary, be relaxed in a numerical solution.

2. CHOICE O F COORDINATE SYSTEM

The coordinates most commonly used in small-strain consolidation theories are defined in space
with respect to an origin fixed in space, and are known as Euler coordinates. However, where
large strains may occur, the coordinates of a boundary will change during the process of
consolidation at a rate that is determined solely by the process itself. There may then be some
advantage in working in material, or Lagrange coordinates, in which a point is labelled in terms
of the amount of solid material between that point and an origin fixed in the material. Thus, the
coordinates move with the material so that a boundary always retains the same coordinates.
The position in space of any given soil particle will depend on the packing of the soil between it
and the fixed origin, so that Lagrange and Euler coordinates can be related through the void
ratio distribution. If both systems are referred to a common origin, fixed both in space and in the
material, then

x= loz(1 + e ) dz

where x is the Euler or space coordinate, z is the Lagrange or material coordinate and e is the
void ratio.
Both systems lead of course to the same solution in terms of the physical behaviour, but
analytical advantages will exist with one or the other, depending upon the boundary conditions
of the specific problem. For the large-strain solutions without self-weight effects, Gibson et
al.'used Lagrange coordinates, while Lee and Sills' solved a similar problem using Euler
coordinates, with a moving boundary.
In this paper, the analysis is developed from the general equation produced by Gibson et al.,'
defined in Lagrange coordinates, with the effect of self-weight inclu'ded in the solution.
A one-dimensional condition is assumed, so that the problem to be solved is that of a strip of
infinite lateral extent, bounded above and below by boundaries that can be either permeable
with unrestricted drainage, or impermeable. Three cases are considered, in the first of which
consolidation is caused by the self-weight of a stratum of initially constant density; in the second,
a uniform surface load acts on a normally consolidated stratum and in the third, a soil layer is
formed and consolidates owing to the steady deposition of soil on to it.

3. T H E GOVERNING EQUATION
The governing equation used in the present study is (Gibson et a/.')

(1)

where z is the solid thickness or material coordinate, a' is the effective stress, k is the
permeability and ps and pf are, respectively, the unit weight of the soil particles and the pore
fluid.
 SELF-WEIGHT CONSOLIDATION 407

The permeability k may be expected to increase with increasing void ratio. As a first
approximation
k
-= k o ( l + e )
Pf
where ko is some constant, is a reasonable assumption, particularly for soft soils at higher void
ratios. Laboratory measurements on a remoulded clayey silt carried out at Oxford show a linear
relationship for void ratios between 1.5 and 4.5.
The coefficient of consolidation, CF,was defined by Gibson et al.' to be,

This parameter combines the stress-strain relationship and permeability, and it has been
found that there is often less variation in the value of CF than there is in its individual
components. The assumption of constant CFis therefore reasonable for a number of soils, even
when strains are Iarge.
Equation (1) then becomes

The first field situation considered is a dredged fill which is assumed to be dumped in situ
instantaneously with a uniform density and void ratio. Consolidation in this case is caused solely
by the self-weight of the soil until the equilibrium condition is achieved whereby the fill is a
normally consolidated stratum. Further consolidation of a normally consolidated stratum due to
a surface loading will be studied subsequently.

4. CONSOLIDATION OF A DREDGED FILL

A dredged fill is taken to have an initially uniform density
e(z,O)=ei 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ (4)
0
where z is measured upwards from the base of the layer and zo is the total solid thickness of the
fill. The effective stress is initially zero, i.e. the fill is fluid-supported at the instant of dumping.
The assumptions already made about permeability and CFimply that dp'lde is constant.
Thus (+I = A - ae where A, a are constant and from (4),
A = aei
so that
cr' = a ( e i - e )

At the end of consolidation, the fill has become a normally consolidated stratum, with an
effective stress distribution in equilibrium with the soil weight:
d ( Z , 00) = ( P , - P t ) ( z - 20)
with a corresponding void ratio distribution given by equation ( 5 ) to be
e(z,m)=ei-P(zo-z)
408 K . LEE A N D G. C. SILLS

where

On a drained boundary, the void ratio will immediately reach its final equilibrium value, given
by equation ( 6 ) .
It will be assumed that the surface of the fill, z = zo, is free to drain, and hence
e ( z o ,t ) = ei (7)
If the base, z = 0, is also pervious, then
e(O, t ) = e i- p z o (8)
In an undrained base, there will be no flow across the base, and hence
au
-=o
az
onz=O

Thus
a
- (u- u'- Uh) = 0
az
where u is the total stress and u h the hydrostatic pressure.
An expression for (u- u h ) may be most easily obtained using Euler coordinates, where
u = [nps + (1- n)prlb(t) - x )
and
uh =pf(s(t)-x)
where s ( t ) is the upper boundary of the layer, which is not fixed in space, and n is the porosity.
Thus
(+ - u h = n ( s ( f )-x)(ps-Pf)
and n ( s ( t )- x ) transforms to (zo - z ) in Lagrange coordinates.
Thus

and

Now

Thus

is the required boundary condition for an impervious base.

 SELF-WEIGHT CONSOLIDATION 409

Analytical solutions may be obtained for the governing equation with both these drainage
conditions, and can be shown to be:
for the pervious base (double drainage);

m = ( 2 n +1) n =O, 1,2,.

and for the impervious base (single drainage);

e ( z , t ) = ei-p z o - z - 2 z 0 C cos ( m2l r z2 / z o )exp

[ mlr
(- c~m:lr2t)l
20

m =3(2n +I) n =o, 1 , 2 , . . .

These can also be expressed in terms of the void ratio change q defined as:
q ( z , t ) = e ( z ,O)-e(z, t ) (13)
and the results are shown in Figure l(a) and Figure l(b ) respectively. A normalized solid
th’ickness y has been defined by dividing z by the total solid thickness:
Z
Y=-
zo

1 1

Y Y

0 1 0 1

%ZO q’!ZO

(a) dminoge from both surface and base i b ) drainage from surface only
Figure 1 . Normalized void ratio change q ( y , r)lOzo against normalized solid thickness y due to self-weight consolida-
tion of layer
410 K L E E A N D G. C . SILLS

The void ratio change q has been normalized by division by PZO,which is the void ratio change
that will occur in the base of the fill. There will be no void ratio change in the drained surface, so
the final distribution will be triangular, as shown for T = co.With base drainage, the void ratio at
the base reaches its final value immediately, so that at y = 0, q/@z0= 1 for all T, in Figure 1(a).
It can be seen that the condition of double drainage causes very much faster consolidation
than single drainage, as would have been expected. Interesting behaviour occurs in-the single
drainage case, as shown in Figure l(b), where it can be seen that the consolidation of the whole
stratum starts from the impervious base. This is in contrast to the traditional theories where
consolidation of a stratum under a load always starts from the drainage boundary. This is shown
most clearly by considering the behaviour of the excess pore water pressure.
The excess pore water pressure u can be obtained from u = (+ - d - uh where
(+ - Uh = ( P s - P f ) ( z -20) (9)

and
(Ps - Pf)
& = a(ei - e ) = aq = 4 (16)
P
~

It then follows from the solution, equation (1l), that:

u = 2 ( P s - PfIZO c sin ( m r y )exp ( - m 2 r 2 T )

n
m7T

m = ( 2 n + 1) n =0,1,2,. . .
for a pervious base, and from equation (12):

m =;(2n + I ) n =o, 1,2,. ..

for an impervious base. Both of these can be normalized by dividing by the common factor
(Ps - P&o:

and the results are shown in Figure 2. Note that before the consolidation starts ( T = 0) the part of
the total stress that arises from the self-weight of the soil is supported by the pore fluid. This
causes the characteristic initial triangular distribution of the excess pore water pressure. As soon
as consolidation is started, this excess pore pressure begins to dissipate with a pattern
determined by the drainage boundary condition as shown in these figures. In the case of an
impervious base, Figure 2(b), the highest initial excess pore pressure is in this impervious base,
and this must be dissipated first before the rest of the stratum can start consolidating.
Consequently, consolidation begins in the impervious base as indicated in Figure 1(b) earlier.
The settlement behaviour of the fill can be investigated in terms of the degree of settlement:

where h(O), h ( T ) and h(co) are, respectively, the initial, current and the final thickness
(measured in space) of the fill. The relationship between space and material coordinates is given
 SELF-WEIGHT CONSOLIDATION 41 1

1 1

Y Y

0 - 0 - 1
U u

(a) dminage from both surface and base (b) dminage from surface only
Figure 2. Normalized excess pore water pressure 17 against normalizedsolid thickness y due to self-weight consolidation
of layer

by:

x(z)=
I (l+e)dz

Hence, h(O),h ( T )and h (00) can be obtained from the solution e ( y , T )using the above equation.
Thus, for a pervious base:
1
S ( T )= 1- 8 17 exp ( - rn ' r 2 T ) (22)
,rn 7~

m =(2n +1) n = 0 , 1 , 2 , .. .
and for an impervious base:

rn =5(2n+1) n =o, 1,2,...

These are shown in Figure 3 in terms of the square root of the (common) time factor T. The two
curves are dissimilar in shape, particularly in the early stages of consolidation. The double
drainage case shows an initially linear portion, a characteristic of many previous consolidation
theories. However, in the case of surface drainage only, the curve has a very different form. For
example, one quarter of the total settlement is achieved with double drainage in about one tenth
of the time required with a single drain, while half and three quarters the total each take about
five times as long with a single drain. Not until more than 95 per cent of the settlement has
occurred d o the times approach the ratio of 4 that might be expected from the respective
drainage path lengths from the traditional Terzaghi theory.
412 K. LEE AND G. C. SILLS

0 05 10
JT
1.5

la) drainage from both surface and base

0 0.5 1.0
JT
1.5

( b ) drainage from surface only

Figure 3. Settlement S ( T ) against J T due to self-weight consolidation of layer

Approximate expressions for equation (22) have the form:

That is, the settlement is proportional to the square root of time for the case of double drainage
for small values of T, and:

for large values of T.

 SELF-WEIGHT CONSOLIDATION 413

In the impervious base solution, equation ( 2 3 ) ,an approximate expression for small values of
T can be obtained by considering its Laplace transform:

For large values of p, the second term in the above equation is small by comparison with the first,
and thus
2
S(p)=- (27)
P2
and hence:
S(T)=2T
which is valid for small values of T. For large values of T the first term of the series solution
equation ( 2 3 ) will dominate and can be used as an approximate solution:
2
32
S(T)-l-~exp
7r

The small and large time approximate solutions, equation (28), ( 2 9 ) , are compared with the
exact solution, equation ( 2 3 ) ,in Table 1. The agreement, as can be seen from this table, is very
good.

Table I. Comparison of approximate solutions with exact solution

Time Exact solution Small time Large time
Factor eq. (23) solution eq. (28) solution eq. (29)
~~ ~

0.0025 0.005 000 0.005000 0.010457

0.01 0.019999 0*020000 0.0237 16
0.0225 0.044999 0.045000 0.046877
0.04 0.079992 0.080000 0.080669
0.0625 0.124808 0~125000 0.12498 1
0.09 0,1786 19 0.180000 0.178650
0.16 0.305673 0.320000 0.305673
0.36 0.575459 - 0.575459
1.0 0.912477 - 0,912477
2.25 0.995994 - 0.995994

5. CONSOLIDATION OF A NORMALLY CONSOLIDATED STRATUM

Once the dredged fill has achieved equilibrium with its own weight and become normally
consolidated, further consolidation will be caused by the application of surface loading. In order
to be compatible with the one-dimensional assumption, this loading is assumed to be of infinite
lateral extent and cause an equal increment of total stress through the stratum. After consolida-
tion has occurred, the effective stress increment will also be equal throughout the layer.
Initially, the void ratio distribution in the stratum is the equilibrium distribution achieved at
the end of the consolidation of a dredged fill, which was described by equation (6). Thus, now
e ( z , O>=ei-P(zo-z) (30)
Because of the linear effective stress-void ratio relationship assumed in this model, the
application of a surface loading q will cause an equal change of void ratio Ae throughout the
414 K. LEE AND G. C. SILLS

stratum in the new equilibrium state, i.e.

e(z,m)=e(z,O)-Ae
The boundary conditions in the drainage faces are given by:
e (0, t ) = ei - Ae (32)
in the surface and.
e ( 0 , t )= ei -pzo - Ae (33)
in the base.
The solution for the case with drainage from both the surface and the base of the stratum is:

e ( z , t)=ei-/3(zo-z)-Ae rn exp (-rn2.rr2T) (34)

rn = ( 2 n + 1) n =0,1,2,. ..
from which follows the degree of settlement:

rn = ( 2 n + 1) n =0,1,2,. ..
When only one of the surfaces is permeable, the boundary condition in the undrained face is
given by:

as before, which may hold in either the surface or the base of the stratum. The solution
corresponding to a surface drain is:

e ( z , t ) = ei - p ( z o - z ) - Ae cos (rn.nz/zo)exp (-rn27r2T)] (36)

m =t(2n +I) n =o, 1 , 2 , . . .

and the degree of settlement is:

rn=1(2n+1) n=0,1,2, ...

It can be seen by comparing equation (35) and equation (37) that the difference in settlement
rate due to an applied load between a double drainage case and a single drainage case is in the
exponential term (since the value of rn differs in the two cases) and can be related to the length of
drainage path as in the Terzaghi theory. This is a result of the linear properties assumed in the
present model, and is in marked contrast to the settlement behaviour when consolidation is due
solely to the weight of the soil.
Owing to the symmetric property in the solution, only the double drainage case need be
considered here. Figure 4 shows the variation of the normalized void ratio change, defined as:
q=- 4
(38)
he
 SELF-WEIGHT CONSOLIDATION 415

Figure 4. Normalized void ratio change 4 against normalized solid thickness y due to a surface loading on a normally
consolidated layer with drainage from both surface and base

and Figure 5 shows the degree of settlement plotted against the square root of the time factor T.
The symmetric property can be seen clearly in Figure 4 with the mid-plane of the symmetry
located at y = 0 . 5 , i.e. the mid-layer. As a consequence, the time-settlement curve for the
double drainage case, Figure 5 , can be used to calculate the rate of settlement in the case of
single drainage simply by scaling the time of the double drainage case by a factor of 4. The
dissipation of the excess pore water pressure can be obtained in a similar manner as the dredged
fill case and will not be reproduced here.

0 0.5 1
JT
Figure 5. Settlement S(T) against JT due to a surface loading on a normally consolidated layer with drainage from both
surface and base
416 K. LEE AND G. C. SILLS

6. SOIL STRATUM FORMED BY DEPOSITION

Under continuous deposition, the total solid thickness of the deposit is a function of time, say
z o = r(t). The governing equation (3) must therefore be satisfied in a moving domain:

o s z sr(t) (39)
It is important to note that the mass sedimentation rate is required to specify the solid
thickness, and the actual thickness (measured in space) of the deposit is not known and must
emerge as part of the solution.
As there is no loading acting on the surface of the deposit and this surface is assumed to be
free-draining, the void ratio there will have a constant value, equal to the just-deposited initial
value:
e(r, t ) = ei (40)
and since the only loading causing consolidation is that due to the self-weight of the deposit, the
void ratio in a pervious base is given by:

e(0, t ) = ei-@r(t) (41)

The boundary condition in an impervious base, with no flow across it, is the same as before:

In the analysis it is found more convenient to use a new variable q, the void ratio change,
defined as:
q ( z , t ) = ei - e(z, t ) (42)

Using this, the governing equation and the boundary conditions become,

q(r, t ) = 0 (44)
q(0, t) = pr(t) for a pervious base (45)

-a4
(O, t ) = - @ for an impervious base (46)
az

A variety of conditions of deposition may be encountered in practice. Typical examples include

intermittent deposition of dredged slurry onto a collecting area and deposition of suspended
material falling on to a river or sea bed, which may be a steady process or largely controlled by
seasonal variation. Any particular deposition may be modelled by the superposition of various
constant rates, possibly combined with periods of no deposition as in Section 4 of this paper. A
solution will therefore be developed for a constant rate of loading, using techniques of numerical
integration. In addition, however, a rate of deposition proportional to the square root of time
will be considered, as this may well be an appropriate function for seasonal changes, and an
analytical solution exists. Superposition of such solutions could provide a simpler approximation
to a given deposition process than the constant deposition solutions.
 SELF-WEIGHT CONSOLIDATION 417

7. DEPOSITION PROPORTIONAL TO T H E SQUARE ROOT OF TIME

The first case to be considered is a deposition which proceeds in proportion to the square root of
time:
r ( t ) = wt1/2 (47)
Again, the solid thickness is normalized by dividing by the current total solid thickness so that
y = z l w t 1/2 (48)
which is bounded by a fixed domain (0, 1).
The governing equation in terms of the new variable y is:

The analysis will not be reproduced here in detail, but, by definition of a constant v as
v = iwc;1/2 (50)
and using the method of separation of variables, the solution is found to be
q(y, t)=[A(exp (-v2y2)+rrivy erf (vy))+By]t; ( 5 1)
The unknown constants A and B in equation (51) can be found by substituting the
appropriate boundary conditions. Thus for a pervious base:
q(y, r)=pwr’/2{exp ( - ~ ~ y ~ ) + erf
~ (vy)-[exp
~ / ~ v y ( - V ~ ) + T ’ / ~ Yerf (v)]y} (52)
and for an impervious base:

For the purpose of comparison between solutions, these can be normalized by dividing by
Pwt‘”, which is the largest void ratio change that can be experienced at current time t. The
resultant normalized void ratio change:

for a pervious base, and:

for an impervious base.

Equation (55) and equation (56)are functions of v and y only and independent of time t. In
other words, if the current state of consolidation of the deposit is taken to be represented by this
normalized void ratio change, then it will appear to remain constant throughout the deposition
with its actual magnitude being determined by the constant v. The constant v, as defined in
equation (50),is a measure of the relative rates of deposition and consolidation. Hence a stiff,
highly permeable soil under a fast deposition may have the same consolidation state (in the sense
418 K. LEE AND G. C. SILLS

described above) as a soft, low permeability soil under a slow deposition. Figure 6 shows the
variation of the normalized void ratio change q ( y , r ) with the normalized solid thickness y for
both the pervious and the impervious base cases. Low values of v correspond to a stiff, highly
permeable soil with a slow rate of deposition. Consolidation will always be near completion
throughout the layer, and the normalized void ratio distribution will be close to linear. A high
value of Y,implying a soft soil with a fast deposition rate, gives a strongly non-linear distribution
of normalized void ratio through the layer.

1 I

Y Y

0.5 0.5

0 0.5 1
0 0.5 - 1
9
(a) pervious base (bl impervious base
Figure 6. Normalized void ratio change cf against normalized solid thickness y for deposition proportional to Jr

The other quantity of frequent interest is the surface settlement, or the variation of the actual
thickness (i.e. measured in space) of the deposit with time. The usual definition of degree of
settlement as a ratio of current to final settlement cannot hold for continuing deposition, and
therefore a new definition is given for the degree of settlement S ( r ) in which the current
settlement b ( t )is divided by the total settlement a ( r ) that would occur if the deposition suddenly
ceased a t this moment.
Thus

where a ( r ) and b ( r ) are shown schematically in Figure 7. The degree of settlement so defined is
thus a relative measurement whose magnitude varies between 0, the fully unconsolidated state,
 SELF-WEIGHT CONSOLIDATlON 419

I , fully unconsolidated thickness

b(t)
Degree of settlement = -
a(t)
Figure 7. Basis for definition of degree of settlement S ( T )

and 1, the fully consolidated state, and S ( t ) for the present deposition rate is given by:

S ( t )=
c
JO
wt”2 d y , t ) dy
:pw2t

and it is found that, for a drained base,

and for an undrained base,

where y ( a , x ) is the incomplete Gamma function defined as:

?(a, x ) = Jox fa.-’ exp ( - t) dt

It can be seen that the degree of settlement in the present case depends only on the parameter
v and remains constant with time. This is analogous to the behaviour of the normalized void
ratio and is shown in Figure 8.

8. DEPOSITION A T A CONSTANT RATE

The second type of deposition considered is one which proceeds at a constant rate m :

r ( t ) = mt

and the types of boundary conditions will be considered separately here.

420 K . LEE AND G. C. SILLS

05

1
0 1 2 3 L 5
V

--- pervious base

- impervious base

Figure 8. Degree of settlement S ( t ) against parameter v for deposition proportional to 41

8.1 Deposition onto a pervious base

The governing equation and the boundary conditions corresponding to this case are:

The solution is:

x :I t’coth (*)2 CF (*) (*)

sinh 2CFt exp 4 CFt d t )

Normalization by dividing by the current total solid thickness mt gives

y =z/mt
q ( Y , t ) = 4(Y, t ) / 4 ( 0 ,t )
and a time factor T :
T = m2t/CF
leading to

q(y, T )= 1 + y2T-
2 2JT
T”’ exp loE
(*)t 2coth (f>sinh ( ) exp (T- t 2) T d t (69)
 SELF-WEIGHT CONSOLIDATION 421

The integral in this equation is evaluated numerically using a simple trapezoidal rule with a
predetermined error bound (Goodwin6). The result is shown in Figure 9(a) where the normal-
ized void ratio change is plotted against the normalized solid thickness.
The degree of settlement in the present case is given by:

1 1

Y Y

0.5 0.5

0 0
0 0.5 - 1 0 0.5 - 1
q q
la) pervious base (b) impervious base

Figure 9. Normalized void ratio change 4 against normalized solid thickness y for constant deposition rate

or:

which is found from equation (69) to be:

S(T)=2+T-T
3 2 I, t’coth (5T/2){2erf &T’’’)+erf ($(l-t)T’’2)-erf ($(l+t)T’’’)}d,$

The trapezoidal rule is also used here to evaluate the integral, and the result is shown in Figure
10. Again, as in the square root deposition case, the scaling factor mZ/CFsuggests that a stiff,
highly permeable soil under a fast deposition may have a consolidation state comparable with
that of a soft, low permeability soil under a slow deposition, for the factor m2/CF in both cases
may be of similar magnitude.
422 K. LEE AND G. C. SILLS

T= m2t/C,=
0.1 1 10 100 1000
0

0.5

1
Figure 10. Degree of settlement S(r) against time factor T for constant deposition rate, pervious base

The state of consolidation of the deposit, either locally as described by the normalized void
ratio change Q ( y , T ) or on average as reflected by the degree of settlement, S ( T ) ,is seen to
decrease as deposition proceeds. As an example, in Figure 10 the degree of settlement is close to
1 in the early stages of deposition, i.e. the deposit has a high consolidation state. As deposition
proceeds, with an increasing time factor, the degree of settlement decreases and in the later
stages of deposition (with a very large time factor) the deposit will have a very low consolidation
state. A similar tendency can also be observed in the normalized void ratio change, from Figure
9(d.
The effect of different deposition rates can be seen by considering the same soil, being
deposited at different speeds m land m2 with m l< m2.The consolidation state for each case is
described by different points on the same curve, since the time factor for m lis smaller than that
for m2.Thus the slower the deposition, the more advanced the consolidation state.

8.2 Deposition onto an impervious base

The governing equation and the boundary condition in the surface of the deposit are given by
equation (62), equation (63), and the boundary condition in the impervious base is:

a4
- (0, t ) = -p
az
The solution may be shown to be

4(y,T)=---T -
m
''' ( (5> (q)
jOm (F) (y)
1'2 exp 5 tanh cosh (7)
exp - t 2 T d t - y )

where the normalized solid thickness y and the time factor T are defined in equation (66) and
equation (67).
 SELF-WEIGHTCONSOLIDATION 423

The normalized void ratio change q ( y , T) follows immediately from equation (73) as

q ( y , T )= (T) 112
exp (*)los 5 tanh (y) ( y ) (+?
cosh exp d5- y (74)

and the degree of settlement S ( T ) is shown to be

OD

S ( T ) = ~ T - ”6~tanh(tT/2)[erf
~~ ( T 1 1 2 ( 1 - ~ ) / 2 ) + e r f ( T ” 2 ( 1 + ~ ) / 2 ) ] d ~ -(75)
1

The integrals in equation (74) and equation (75) are evaluated numerically using the trapezoidal
rule as before, and the results are shown in Figure 9(b) and Figure 11 respectively. It can be seen
that, as in the pervious base case, the rate of consolidation of the deposit decelerates as
deposition proceeds.
The variation of the normalized void ratio change in the impervious base of the deposit is also
shown in Figure 11for comparison. This represents the local consolidation state in the base and

T= m2t/C,=
0.1 1 10 100 1000
0

0.5

1
Figure 11. Degree of settlement S ( r ) and normalized base void ratio change d(0,t ) against time factor T for constant
deposition rate, impervious base

is seen to be closer to unity than the degree of settlement which is a measure of the average
consolidation through the layer. Thus, at any given time, proportionately more consolidation
has occurred at the impervious base than has occurred elsewhere.

9. CONSOLIDATION AFTER DEPOSITION

Following the end of deposition, at time t = t l , the deposit will continue to consolidate under its
own weight. The equation that governs this process is given by equation (3) which is bounded in
the domain (0 s z s zo, t 3 tl} with an initial condition given by the solution at the end of
deposition. Standard techniques for the solution of partial differential equations may be used
since the boundaries are fixed (in material coordinates) and a Fourier method is chosen. Only the
consolidation following the end of a constant rate of deposition is considered, and the solutions
are recorded below without proof.
424 K. LEE A N D G. C. SILLS

The solution for a pervious base is:

where the total solid thickness is mtl and the normalized solid thickness
y =z/mtl T = mzt/CF

Ti=m2 tl/CF Tv=(T-T1)/T:

and

- y cosh ( y T l / 2 )sinh (y T l x / 2 )exp ( - ( ( x 2 + ) ( n m ) dy dx

y 2 ) T 1 / 4sin
0
(79)
The degree of settlement is found to be:

The Fourier coefficients bn in equation (79) are evaluated numerically by using the trapezoidal
rule for the inner integral and a quadrature for the outer integral. The calculated degree of
settlement is shown in Figure 12 in terms of the time factor m2t/CF.The dashed curve has the
form already seen in Figure 10, and each of the solid curves indicates the subsequent
consolidation for different times t l marking the end of deposition. It can be seen that the
consolidation of the total amount of material proceeds more quickly than the original deposi-
tion, particularly for the smaller values of the time factor, where the degree of settlement has not
exceeded one half.

T = m2t+
0.I 1 10 1000
0 - I I 1

0.5

1
Figure 12. Degree of settlement S ( t ) against time factor T following end of deposition, pervious base
 SELF-WEIGHT CONSOLIDATION 425

The solution for an impervious base is:

(81)

where
1 0 0
2
cn =(-1)" + ( T ~ / . R Jo) ' /Jo~ y tanh ( y ~ 1 / 2cosh
) (xyT1/2)
(2n - l ) T

x exp [ - x 2 + y 2 ) ~ 1 / 4cos
] [(2n2- '>
- 7rx] dy dx (82)

and the degree of settlement is:

2n-1 '
8 (-1)"
I T n 2 n - 1 cn exp
S(Tv)=1+-C- [ -(y) T2~,3 (83)

This is evaluated using the technique outlined above and is shown in Figure 13. Similar
comments may be made as for Figure 12.

T= m2t / C
0.1 1 10 100 1000
0

0.5

1
Figure 13. Degree of settlement S(r) against time factor 7'following end of deposition, impervious base

10. A COMMON TIME FACTOR

Basically three different types of deposition have been considered. In Section 4, no deposition
occurred, but consolidation was due solely to the self-weight of the soil, and this may therefore
be included under the description of zero rate of deposition. In Section 7, deposition proceeded
with the square root of time and in Section 8, linearly with time. In each case, the normalized
void ratio or degree of settlement can be used to describe the state of consolidation-that is, how
far the soil is from its fully consolidated equilibrium state. The normalized void ratio is a measure
of the local consolidation state in the layer, while the degree of settlement indicates the average
consolidation state. It is seen that, in the first case, of zero deposition, the consolidation state
426 K. LEE AND G . C. SILLS

continually improves; in the square root time deposition, the consolidation state remains
constant; while, for a steady deposition, the consolidation state continually deteriorates. It thus
appears that the progress of consolidation is dictated by the mode of deposition.
Each of these three cases has been analysed in terms of different time factors, in which real
time is multiplied by parameters appropriate to the soil and the loading. It is now proposed to
define a unique time factor, in order to present a unified description of consolidation behaviour
during deposition.
(coeff. of consolidation of the soil) x (real time)
Time factor F =
(square of the current solid thickness of the layer)
It may be noted that this definition is consistent with that of the normalized solid thickness y
used throughout this paper, defined as the material coordinate z divided by the current total
solid thickness. Thus, for the instantaneously dumped fill, with zero deposition time

which is the time factor adopted in the earlier analysis, see equation (15). For the deposition
proportional to the square root of time

For the constant rate of deposition

which is the reciprocal of the time factor adopted in the earlier analysis, see equation (68).
The degree of settlement for each of the three cases is shown in Figure 14,plotted against the
time factor F. It can be seen that the consolidation state consistently improves with increasing
values of the time factor. In the case of instantaneous deposition, where the time factor is
proportional to real time, the consolidation state also improves in real time. For the square root
time deposition, the time factor is independent of real time and there is therefore no change in
the consolidation state. That is, there will be one particular point on the curve 2 in Figure 14
associated with a particular value w. For a constant deposition rate, the real time travels in the
opposite direction to the time factor. Thus the improvement in consolidation state with time
factor implies deterioration with real time.
The relationship between the real time and the time factor F therefore provides a useful
criterion to determine how, in a particular deposition process, the consolidation state in the layer
changes. When the mode of deposition is such that the time factor F and the real time travel in
the same direction, improvement occurs as deposition proceeds. When the time factor F
increases as real time decreases, then the consolidation state in real time worsens as deposition
proceeds.

11. CONCLUSION
In order to describe soft soil consolidation, and consolidation during and after deposition, the
inclusion of the self-weight of the soil is of paramount importance. A model has been proposed
with no restriction on the magnitude of strains, and solutions presented for various cases.
 SELF-WEIGHT CONSOLIDATION 427

O I

0.01 0.1 1 100

lo F
(a) drainage f r o m both surface and base

1 Deposition at constant rate

2 Deposition proportional t o square root time

3 Instantaneous dumping

0.5 -

1
0.01 0.1 1 100
lo F
(b) drainage from surface only
Figure 14. Degree of settlement S ( t ) against unified time factor F for varying rates of deposition

Inevitably, some idealizations have to be made concerning soil parameters such as consolidation
characteristics, and in this model, the coefficient of consolidation CFhas been assumed to be
constant, and the permeability has been taken to be proportional to (1+ e), where e is the void
ratio. There is some evidence that these assumptions may hold reasonably well for some soils,
and they should be seen as the first step in producing a model to describe self-weight
consolidation. Certainly, the introduction of self-weight has produced insights into consolida-
tion behaviour that are not available with previously existing theories.
The importance of base drainage to speed the consolidation process for soil consolidating
under its own weight has been outlined in Section 4. This could substantially reduce the time
428 K. LEE AND G . C. SILLS

taken by dredged fill, dumped for reclamation, to dewater, and suggests that the deposition of
sand layers to provide such drainage could, in some circumstances, be an economic proposition.
The effect of self-weight may be less marked when an additional, external load is applied to
the soil layer, and this is studied in Section 5 . A thin stiff stratum of soil will behave in a similar
manner to that predicted by the traditional theories, so that it is only for a thick, compressible
layer that the present model need be used.
In Sections 7 and 8, soil deposition has been examined. The degree of settlement has been
defined to describe the consolidation state. It is a measure of how far the current consolidation is
from the final equilibrium state that would exist for the same amount of material. For deposition
proportional to the square root of time, the soil remains a constant consolidation state, while for
constant rate of deposition, the consolidation state worsens until the deposition ceases, and only
then improves, as shown in Section 9. This situation is examined further in Section 10,where the
definition of a unique time factor leads to the conclusion that, for any deposition rate slower than
the square root of time, the consolidation state will improve in real time; whereas rates faster
than this imply that the soil moves further from its equilibrium state as deposition proceeds.
In order to assess the applicability of this model, accurate field measurements in soft soils will
be needed, and comparisons should be made between the predictions of different consolidation
theories. The solutions in this paper have been presented in terms of normalized coordinates and
cannot be easily applied to field situations. It is, therefore, proposed to describe in a subsequent
paper the applications of this model to typical soils and to quantify further the importance of
self-weight in different situations.

REFERENCES
1. P. L. Berry a1.d T. J. Poskitt. ‘The consolidation of peat’. Gkotechnique 22, 27-52 (1972).
2. M. A. Biot, ‘General theory of three dimensional consolidation’, J. Appl. Phys., 12, 155-164 (1941).
3. J. P. Carter, J. R. Booker and J. C. Small, ‘The analysis of finite elasto-plastic consolidation’, Int. J. Numer. Anal.
Methods Geomech., 3, 107-129 (1979).
4. E. H. Davis and G. P. Raymond, ‘A non-linear theory of consolidation’, Gkotechnique, 15, 161-173 (1965).
5. R. E. Gibson, G. L. England and M. J. L. Hussey, ’The theory of one dimensional consolidation of saturated clays. I.
Finite non-linear consolidation of thin homogeneous layeg’, Gkotecbnique, 17, 261-273 (1967).
6. E. T. Goodwin, ‘The evaluation of integrals of the form J-,f(x)e-” dx’, Proc. Cam. Phil. SOC.,45, 241 (1949).
7. K. Lee and G. C. Sills, ‘A moving boundary approach to large strain consolidation of a thin soil layer’, Proc. 3rd Inr.
Conf.on Num. Methods in Geomech., Balkema, Rotterdam (1979).
8. A. McNabb. ‘A mathematical treatment of one-dimensional soil consolidation’, Q. Appl. Math., 17, 337-347
(1960).
9. R. E. Olson and C. C. Ladd, ‘One-dimensional consolidation problems’, J. Geotech. Engng. Div., Proc. A m . SOC.
Civ. Eng., 105, 11-30 (1979).
10. L. Rendulic, ‘Porenziffer und Porenwasserdruck in Tonen’, Bauingenieur, 17, 559-564 (1936).
11. J. C. Small, J. R. Booker and E. H. Davis, ‘Elasto-plastic consolidation of soil‘, Int. 1.Solids Struct., 12,431-448
(1976).
12. K. Terzaghi, ‘Die Beziehungen zwischen Elastizitat und Innerdruck’, A k a d . Wiss. Wien. Sirz. Math. K1. Ha, 132,
125-138 (1923).