SOILS AND FOUNDATIONS Vol. 36, No. 3, 31-42, Sept.

1996
Japanese Geotechnical Society .

COMPARISON OF THE HYPERBOLIC AND ASAOKA OBSERVATIONAL METHOD OF

MONITORING CONSOLIDATION WITH VERTICAL DRAINS

SIEW-ANN TANi) and SooN-HoE CHEwii)

ABSTRACT
The use of vertical drains and surcharge to accelerate the consolidation of clayey soils is well established in soil im-
provement technology. For this method of soil treatment, it is important to monitor the progress of consolidation
where the average degree of consolidation is usually defined as the ratio of current settlement to the ultimate settle-
ment due to primary consolidation. An accurate estimate of the ultimate primary settlement is, therefore, required in
order to determine the state of consolidation, and the appropriate time for surcharge removal when the desired degree
of consolidation has been achieved.
Recently, Tan (1995) proposed a new hyperbolic method to identify the 60% and the 90% consolidation stages
from field settlement data due to one dimensional consolidation. Knowing the settlement at these points, it is possible
to determine the ultimate primary settlement. Once sufficient data has been recorded to identify the linear portion of
the hyperbolic plot between the 60% to 90% consolidation stages, the method can be employed. This method has
been validated by application to various well documented case histories in the published literature. In Japan,
however, Asaoka's method for estimating ultimate primary settlement from field observation has been widely used
and is well accepted by the geotechnical engineering community.
This research paper presents a comparison of two different observational methods for monitoring the progress of
consolidation to determine their similarity and differences, and their accuracy of predictions compared to actual obser-
vations. First, the theoretical basis of the two methods are examined. It was found that settlement data beyond the
60% consolidation stage are needed in both methods to make accurate predictions of ultimate primary settlement.
Next, both methods are applied to oedometer laboratory consolidation data for kaolin specimens in order to deter-
mine how prediction of ultimate primary settlement and coefficient of consolidation would compare in carefully con-
trolled laboratory experiments. Finally, both methods are applied to several well documented case histories of vertical
drain projects, and the predictions of ultimate primary settlement and in situ coefficient of consolidation are com-
pared. It was found that both methods gave good agreement with predictions, making them complementary tools for
use in monitoring consolidation in field applications.

Key words: Asaoka's method, clays, hyperbolic method, ultimate primary settlement, vertical drains (IGC: D4/E2)

the treated clays before and after surcharge application.

INTRODUCTION
For rapid improvement of low permeability clayey
soils, it is common practice to install vertical drains, and
apply a surcharge load to accelerate consolidation of the
clays with both vertical and horizontal drainage provided
through the closely spaced vertical drains. Several
methods are available to monitor and evaluate the degree
of soil improvement achieved. These include the monitor-
ing of excess pore pressure dissipation with time, estimat-
ing the average degree of consolidation from settlement
records, measuring the increase of undrained shear
strength and the increase of preconsolidation pressures in
Of these methods, the most widely accepted criteria is the
average degree of consolidation attained, determined
from settlement records.
The average degree of consolidation is also the average
degree of settlement, which is the ratio of current settle-
ment to the ultimate primary settlement. In order to deter-
mine the average degree of settlement, a reliable estimate
of the ultimate primary settlement is necessary. The usual
practice is to calculate the primary consolidation settle-
ment based on the thickness of the soil layer and its com-
pressibility properties, together with the increase in effec-
tive stress resulting from the surcharge load. Soil proper-

i) Senior Lecturer, Department of Civil Engineering, National University of Singapore, 10 Kent Ridge Cresent, Singapore 0511.
ii) Lecturer, ditto.
Manuscript was received for review on April 3, 1995.
Written discussions on this paper should be submitted before April1, 1997 to the Japanese Geotechnical Society, Sugayama Bldg. 4 F, Kanda
Awaji-cho 2-23, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 101, Japan. Upon request the closing date may be extended one month.

31
This is an Open Access article under the CC-BY-NC-ND license.

NII-Electronic Library Service

32 TAN AND CHEW

ties are highly variable however, and even with the best 1.4
soil investigation program, the settlement predictions can
1.2 - Terzaghi Theory
be quite varied and inaccurate when compared to the ac-
tual observed settlement in the field. It is desirable there- 1.0
fore to use observational procedures, based upon which 0.8
the ultimate primary settlement can be estimated once ;f
J-? 0.6
sufficient settlement data has been recorded. The hyper-
bolic method which was proposed and refined by Tan 0.4
(1993, 1994, 1995) is one such observational method, and 0.2
the other established method is that proposed by Asaoka (a)
0.0
(1978), in which early field settlement data is used to 0 0.2 0.4 0.8 1.2
predict completion of primary settlement and the in situ
coefficient of consolidation. These procedures have a
good theoretical basis, and they have the distinct advan- 0.6~------------~--------------.

tage of estimating the ultimate primary settlement from -+-- Field settlement
the early settlement record of a drain installation to see if
the system is functioning as intended in the design. ,........,0.4
In order to evaluate their similarity and differences, the E
.g
theory and applications of the two methods are com- ~ T = Cvt/H 2
"0
pared in this paper. :;:::. 0.2 Cv= 1 m2 /yr
H=5n'l

THEORY OF METHODS ault=50cm (b)

O.O~......L...........L..............~...<...<.......L..............t................~...<...<........t................t....._._....L-.....I....o-J...,............t.................L-.....I....>..J

Theory of Hyperbolic Method
The hyperbolic method as proposed by Tan (1995) had
its origins 'in the rectangular hyperbola fitting method
proposed by Sridharan et al. (1981, 1987), which is a
method for obtaining the coefficient of consolidation, Cv
from oedometer tests, by fitting laboratory settlement
data to the linear segment of the hyperbolic plot between
the U60 and U9o points of the theoretical Tv/ Uv vs Tv plot.
The basis of this method is shown in Fig. 1. The Terzaghi
theory of consolidation gives a unique settlement-time
plot in terms of the average degree of consolidation
against the time factor, Uv vs Tv. When the settlement is
plotted as Tv! Uv vs Tv as shown in Fig. 1(a), the feature
of the plot is an initial concave segment up to U6o, fol-
lowed by a linear segment between U6o and U9o· This
straight line portion can be represented by the equation:
Tv
u=aTv+/3 (1)
which is the equation representing a rectangular hyperbo-
la, with a as the slope and /3 as the intercept of the hyper-
bolic plot. When lines radiating from the origin are
drawn to U6o and U9o, the slopes of these lines are a6o =
1/0.6 and a9o=1/0.9, respectively. The slope of the
linear segment is determined from a least squares linear
regression with coefficient r 2 greater than 0.9999, to be
ai=0.821, a unique value applicable only to Terzaghi's
theory.
In field monitoring of the consolidation of soils, plots
of settlement (o) versus time (t) are recorded. When a
hypothetical field settlement data is plotted in the form
of t/ o vs t, as in Fig. 1(b), that is time/ settlement vs
time, the same features as the theoretical plot are ob-
served, namely an initial concave segment, followed by a
linear segment between the 60% and 90% consolidation
state. This feature can be expanded to identify the 60%
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26
t (yr)
Fig. l(a), (b). Hyperbolic plots of Terzaghi theory and field settle-
ment data
and 90% consolidation stages for any consolidation set-
tlement data by noting the relationships that the slopes of
lines radiating from the origin to these points make with
the linear segment of the plots. Thus, the slopes S6o and
S9o can be determined by:
a6o S;
S6o=Si-=(1/0.6)- (2)
a; a;
(3)
where, S; is the slope of the initial linear segment of the
t I o vs t plot, and a; is the slope of the theoretical Tv/ Uv
vs Tv plot as shown in Fig. 1. In the earlier work by Tan
(1995), the symbol a instead of a; was used. The latter
symbol is preferred as the subscript "i" emphasized that
the theoretical slope considered is the initial linear seg-
ment between the 60% and 90% consolidation stages. If
the slope of initial linear segment (S;) of the field hyper-
bolic plots between the 60% and 90% consolidation
stages can be determined during field monitoring of settle-
ments; S 60 and S9o can be calculated. By constructing
these radiating lines to intersect the first linear segment of
the field hyperbolic plot, the 60% and 90% settlement
points can easily be identified. The ultimate primary set-
tlement can then be estimated as 06o/0.6 or o9o/0.9,
where o6o and o9o are 60% and 90% of the ultimate prima-
ry settlement. Based on Eq. (2), the line radiating from
the origin to the 60% settlement point in the Fig. 1(b) can
also be expressed by:

NII-Electronic Library Service

 PREDICTION OF CONSOLIDATION SETTLEMENT 33

si ted as shown in Fig. 2. The unique features of all these

(tl6) (110.6) t (4)
CX.i
At the intersection of this radiating line with the first
linear segment of the field plot, in Fig. 1(b), t6o is the time
and 66o is the settlement at the 60% consolidation stage.
Thus, 66o can also be obtained from Eq. (4) as t6oiU6ol
66o), which is 1I (1 I 0.6)(cx.i I Si). Therefore 66o I 0.6 is sim-
ply CX.i I Sj. Similar arguments can be advanced for the
90% consolidation point which leads to the conclusion
that the ultimate primary settlement can be obtained
from any of the three expressions:
CX.i 660 690
6utt= si = 0.6= 0.9 (5)
The proposed method is based on theory with instan-
taneous loading. Since the method attempts to fit field set-
tlement data beyond the 60% consolidation stage, it is
not sensitive to the nature of the initial loading condition
as long as the loading period is small compared to the
time required for 60% consolidation to occur.
To extend the work to vertical drains, Tan (1995), ap-
plied Barron's (1948) theory for radial consolidation and
Carillo's (1942) theorem for combined vertical (Terzaghi)
and radial (Barron) flow to produce the theoretical settle-
ment-time data applicable to vertical drains. The equa-
tions used are given below.
The average degree of consolidation as a function of
time factor for Terzaghi's theory of consolidation by ver-
tical flow can be expressed as:
hyperbolic plots are their initial concave segments, fol-
lowed by the first linear segments between the 60% and
90% consolidation stages. After 90% consolidation, the
curves concave slightly upward and tend toward coinci-
dence with the second linear segments which have a slope
value of 1. The inverse of the second linear segment indi-
cates an ultimate degree of settlement of 1, which is the
correct theoretical value at 100% primary consolidation.
The slopes cx.i, however, are different for each of the
three cases shown in Fig. 2. For the Terzaghi case in Fig.
1(a), CX.i is 0.821. For the cases shown in Fig. 2, however
all the cx.i are less than 0.821. Tan (1995) conducted exten-
sive parametric studies and showed that CX.i for vertical
drain problems is dependent only on the ratios n, HID
and chI Cv, which are plotted in Fig. 3. It is recognized
that the values of CX.i obtained from Figs. 1(a) and 3 are ap-
plicable to a homogeneous soil layer with a single value
of chI Cv. For any real problem with multi layered soils,
however an estimate of the average chI Cv applicable for
the soils at the site would be required in order to use the
data from Fig. 3.
For any practical vertical drain problem, CX.i can be ob-
tained from Fig. 3. The slope of the first linear segment
of t I 6 vs t plot, Si can be obtained once the initial
0.25
0.20 cx 60 =1/0.6 0 90 =1/0.9

TTv=
v,
~
f;- for 2 < 0 ... 2
Cvf
Tv= H (6a) 0.15 o Uso
Drain Influence
~ c. Ugo Diameter (D)
....... -- 1m
T,= ;~<::.0 ...2
0.10
U,= 1-:, exp ( -:'T,) for (6b)
-2m
---- 3m
0.05 d =0.05 m
ClayH 10m
The average degree of consolidation for radial consoli-
dation by Barron's theory is given by Hansbo (1981) as:
0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25
U•=l-exp(-:T•) for T.=~; (7a) Tv
Fig. 2. Hyperbolic plots of typical settlement with vertical drains
where
n2 3n 2 -1
p=-2-1ln (n)--4
2 (7b) 0.82 r-----------------------.
n- n
where n=drain spacing ratio, Dl d; D=diameter of an 0.80
~ . . . 0. . . . . . . . ---o------ ----------0 o
o H/D=2
H/D=5
equivalent soil cylinder influenced by each drain, which is ,~ a. HID= 10
;:? I
o H/D =·20
equal to 1.13s for a square pattern and 1.05s for a triangu- g?
cl
::::> 0.78
lar pattern (s=drain spacing) and d=diameter of sand
drain or equivalent diameter of prefabricated flexible ?
0
drain, for which Hansbo (1981) recommended that 8_0.76
.2
d=2(b+t)l n. (.J)

tr
The average degree for combined vertical and radial 0.74
consolidation can be obtained from Carillo's theorem ch/cv =1 ch/cv = 3 ch/cv = 9
(1942):
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
(8)
Drain Spacing Ratio (n =D/d)
Using Eqs. (6) to (8), the theoretical settlement-time Fig. 3• Plotofextasafunctionofn=D/d,H/Dandch/cvforvertical
for any vertical drain problem can be computed and plot- drains

NII-Electronic Library Service

34 TAN AND CHEW

straight line part can be observed beyond the 60% con-
solidation stage. With Ot.i and Si determined, 860 and Sgo is
computed from Eqs. (2) and (3), and the two radial lines
from the origin drawn with these slopes to intercept the
first linear segment of the field hyperbolic plot at the 60%
and extended to the 90% consolidation points. Thus o6o
and Ogo can be estimated, and the ultimate primary settle-
ment can be computed from Eq. (5).
Since this procedure also identifies the time for 60%
and 90% consolidation (t6o and tgo) for the combined
flow consolidation in the vertical drain system, it is possi-
ble to estimate the gross average in situ field consolida-
tion coefficient ch, assuming that the value of Cv from
laboratory oedometer tests on high quality undisturbed
field samples is known. For the vertical drain case, Uv
will rarely exceed 50%. Therefore, with t= t6o and t= tgo
and for radial drainage only, in situ ch can be estimated
by:
lnPt
(14)
.Lit
To evaluate what the appropriate range of settlement
data would be for least squares linear regression to deter-
mine Po and Pt in the Asaoka plot, that would give ac-
curate estimates of end of primary settlement in Eq. (11),
the Terzaghi theory settlement is used for time incre-
ments .LI Tv of 0.01, 0.025 and 0.05 using Eqs. (6a), (b).
These are plotted in the Asaoka form of Un-t vs Un in
Fig. 4. Least squares linear regression is used on the plots
1.2~----------------------------~

for the combined flow known, Uv can be calculated from Asaoka's plots for
Eq. (6a). Using Carillo's theorem of Eq. (8), Uh at the Terzaghi's Uv data
time t6o or tgo can be calculated, since U=0.6 or 0.9. Rear-
ranging Eq. (7a), the values of ch corresponding to t6o or
tgo are given as:
-f..lD 2 ln (1- Uh)
(9)
8t
ATV
Theory of Asaoka's Method --0.01
In 1978, Asaoka proposed an "observational proce-
dure" in which early settlement data can be used to -+- 0.025
predict the ultimate primary settlement and in situ ..... 0.05
coefficient of consolidation for one dimensional consoli-
dation. The method is becoming increasingly popular be-
cause of its simplicity and lack of required for detailed 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
sampling and laboratory testing to determine soil proper-
ties or for the monitoring of field pore pressure behavior. un-1
The Asaoka method is based on the fact that one dimen- Fig. 4. Asaoka's plots of Terzaghi's Uv data for various time incre-
sional consolidation settlements oo, o~, o2, etc. at times 0, ments
.LIt, 2.LI t, etc., can be expressed as a first order approxima-
tion by:
Table 1. Influence of data range used for regression, on Asaoka's
(10)
method
which represents a straight line in a On- 1 vs on known as Time increment Regression
Po Pt Cv Uutt or U100
the Asaoka's plot, where Po is the intercept and Pt is the and data range coefficient =Po/(1-Pt)
slope of the. line. When the ultimate primary settlement used to obtain rz
has been reached, On= On-1 = Outt· Hence the end of prima- Ps
ry or ultimate primary settlement Outt is given by: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
LlTv=O.Ol
(11) Uo to U3o 0.095 0.712 0.971 13.76 0.33
U3o to U60 0.030 0.966 0.999 1.42 0.87
The number of time increments for 90% consolidation, u60 to U90 0.024 0.976 1 1 1
ho, is given as: LlTv=0.025
U0 to U30 0.170 0.562 0.968 9.34 0.39
U3o to U6o 0.071 0.919 0.999 1.37 0.88
(12)
U6o to U90 0.060 0.940 1 1 1

For estimating the in situ coefficient of consolidation, Ll Tv=0.05

Uo to U3o 0.247 0.499 0.975 5.64 0.49
Magnan and Deroy (1980) determined that for vertical 0.131 0.855 0.999 1.27 0.91
U3o to u60
drainage only, the in situ Cv can be estimated by: U6o to U90 0.116 0.884 1 1 1
In Pt n2cv Asaoka's method is applied to settlement data generated from Ter-
- - = - -2 for Tv>0.2 (13)
.Lit 4H zaghi's theory with time increment of 0.01, 0.025, and 0.05, respec-
tively. The theoretical values of cv = 1, and Uu 11 = 1.

NII-Electronic Library Service

 PREDICTION OF CONSOLIDATION SETTLEMENT 35

to determine Po and Pt for the data range of U0 to U3 0 , U3o used with each load applied for 24 hours. The settlement
to U6o, and U6o to U9o for the three time increments. data was recorded electronically at every 1Os interval, in
These are shown in Table 1, together with the regression order to permit Asaoka's method to be applied for vari-
coefficients, and the computed Cv using Eq. (13), and com- ous time increments of Ll t= 10, 20, 30, 40 and 50s. The
puted ~utt using Eq. (11). The exact values for both Cv and typical Asaoka plot for the load step of 2 to 4 kPa at the
~utt is 1. The results showed that using early settlement five time increments is shown in Fig. 5. Using a least
data in the Asaoka plot, say, from O% to 30% consolida- squares linear regression on the plots for data between
tion, would give very low estimates of ~utt and gross over- the 60% and 90% consolidation stages, the values of Po
estimates of Cv, with improving estimates for larger time and Pt were obtained with regression coefficient greater
increments. Using the data range from 30% to 60% con- than 0.999, and the corresponding values ofho, Cv and ~utt
solidation showed much better estimates, ~utt however is computed from Eqs. (11) to (13), with the results tabu-
still underestimated by about 10%, with Cv overestimated lated in Table 2. Although the values of Po and Pt are
by about 30%. Only regression with settlement data be- different for the different time increments used, the
yond 60% consolidation, determine the exact values for values of Cv and ~utt are almost the same, varying between
both ~utt and Cv. 0.68 and 0.72 mm2 Is, and 0.983 and 0.988 mm, respec-
This conclusion was supported by the work of Bergado tively. It would seem therefore that for normal primary
et al. (1991), who found that applying Asaoka's method consolidation settlement as seen in kaolin, the choice of
to their field trial with vertical drains in Bangkok, indi- time increment does not really matter, as long as the ho
cated that the accurate prediction of in situ coefficient of fall within the range between 10 to 90.
consolidation was only obtained when Pt was determined Using the kaolin consolidation test data, the values of
using data beyond 60% consolidation. Both the hyperbol- Cv and ~utt were estimated by the conventional, hyperbolic
ic and Asaoka's methods therefore require data beyond
60% consolidation for accurate prediction of settlement
and in situ coefficient of consolidation. 1.2 .
Asaoka's plots for
Kaolin specimen consolidatio
COMPARISON USING LABORATORY ( load from 2 to 4 kPa )
OEDOMETER DATA
Edil et al. (1991) reported that the accuracy of the At(s)
Asaoka's observational method is strongly dependent on .......
the choice of time increments used. They suggested that
--10s
for reasonable predictions in clays, the chosen time incre-
E
ment should give a hs (number of time steps to reach the
E
.......... ---- 20s
95% consolidation stage) value between 10 and 30. They -+- 30s
also determined that the method produces bilinear plots
for peat and its applicability to peat settlement is highly -...-- 40s
questionable. This may be expected as settlement in peat
is largely a secondary compression phenomena at con- -@-50s
stant effective stress, unrelated to the consolidation proc-
ess. To check this dependence on time increment, a 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
laboratory oedometer test was conducted on kaolin with
a liquid limit=55, plasticity index=25, and initial void l>n-1 (mm)
ratio=0.8. The specimen was cut to 75 mm diameter, Fig. 5. Asaoka's plots of kaolin consolidation data for various time
and 25 mm height, and a load increment of unity was increments

Table 2. Influence of time increment Lf t, on Asaoka's method applied to kaolin test data
ln (1- U90 ) t90=j9oL1 t duu=f3o/(1-f3t)
L1 t (s) Po (mm) Pt j90 (s) cv (mm2 /s) (mm)
ln (/3 1)
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
10 0.026 0.973 86 860 0.682 0.986
20 0.051 0.948 43 868 0.697 0.988
30 0.078 0.921 28 841 0.721 0.983
40 0.102 0.897 21 851 0.712 0.986
50 0.124 0.874 17 862 0.702 0.988

Test data for kaolin specimen in oedometer 75 mm diameter by 25 mm height. LL=55; PI=25; Initial void ratio=0.8, Load step from 2 kPa to 4
kPa. Measured Ouu=l.Omm; Cv from Casagrande's t50 =0.513 mm 2 /s; cv from Taylor's t90 =0.613 mm2 /s

NII-Electronic Library Service

 36 TAN AND CHEW

and Asaoka methods as follows. Figures 6(a) and (b) 2400~-----------------------------~

show the settlement test data plotted in logarithm and Kaolin d=75mm H=25mm
square-root time scale, from which the Casagrande's 2000 Load 2kPa to 4kPa
procedure was used to obtain tso, and Cv was calculated
from Tvso=0.197. Taylor's procedure was used to obtain 1600
t9o, and Cv was calculated from Tv9o=0.848. Although 'E
E
there is no rigorous theoretical basis for Casagrande's ~ 1200
method, it has been established that for well defined S
800
curves in the log t plot, the method provides reasonably
accurate estimates of Cv values as shown by Sridharan et
400
al. (1987). Figure 7(a) to (d) show the hyperbolic plots (a)
for the same settlements data, with the radial lines for the 0~--~---~----~----~--~~---J

60% and 90% consolidation stages superimposed. From 0 400 800 1200 1600 2000 2400
these plots, si, t6o, and t9o is determined and the values of Time, t (s)
Cv and Outt computed from Tv6o=0.287, Tv9o=0.848, and
ouu=0.821/ Si. The Asaoka plots for a time increment of sooo~----------------------------~
Kaolin d=75mm H=24.3mm
30s for the same settlements data are shown in Fig. 8. A
Load 4kPa to 8kPa
least squares linear regression using data between the
60% and 90% consolidation stages gives Po and fit values
with a regression coefficient greater than 0.999. Based on 'E
these regression analyses, the values of cv and Outt were E
~ 4000
computed using Eqs. (13) and (11), and all the results are co
summarized in Table 3. Using the results indicated in Ta- :;;;;

ble 3, the values of Outt determined by both the hyperbolic 2000

and Asaoka methods were compared to observed settle-
ments as shown in Fig. 9(a). It is obvious, that both (b)
0~-~------L.--~---~-~--~
methods gave very close results to the observed settle- 0 400 800 1200 1600 2000 2400
Time, t (s)

0. 4 .--K-a_o_li_n_d_=_7_5_m_m_________________~L~o-a~d~S~te-p~

Initial ht = 25.5mm ""'"2-4kPa

e o +4-SkPa
4000
.S.o.2
«:t
5i -0.4 'E 3ooo
E .§
.5! -0.6 .!.
~ ~ 2000
(/) -0.8

-1 (a) 1000
-1.2 ..__________ _________.________ _ _ j ---~.

(c)
10 100 1000 10000
Time, t (s) 400 800 1200 1600 2000 2400
Time, t (s)
0.4~---------------------~
Kaolin d=75mm 4000~--------------------------~
Initial ht = 25.5mm Kaolin d=75mm H=23.5mm
Load 16kPa to 32kPa

Load Step
-11- 2·4kPa
+4-8kPa
*8-16kPa
·1 --16-32kPa
-1.2 L......o........J..................._...........o...L.........._..~..........~~.........L..............o...L.................L................I.....L..o-......J (d)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 1 00
Square Root Time (s) 300 600 900 1200
Time, t (s)
Fig. 6(a), (b). Kaolin oedometer settlements plotted at both
logarithmic and square root time scales Fig. 7(a)-(d). Hyperbolic plots of kaolin oedometer settlements

NII-Electronic Library Service

 PREDICTION OF CONSOLIDATION SETTLEMENT 37

ments, with less than 2% error. Similarly, all the proce- 2

dures for obtaining Cv are compared in Fig. 9(b). Using s Gradient

the Casagrande procedure as the observed value, the .s • Hyperbolic ctdS, 1.02
hyperbolic method under estimate Cv by about 7%, -gfll 1.5 "" Asaoka
.c
whereas the Asaoka method over estimated Cv by about G)
E
14%. These are acceptable errors, considering the .c
~
variability that can be expected in soil properties, for ac- 0
tual engineering applications. ~
"0
~
E o.5
iw
1.2~----------------------------~ :p. (a)
Asaoka's plots of Kaolin 110;;

0
for time increment of 30s 0 0.5 1.5 2
1 6. 1u Observed primary settlement (mm)
2
(i) Gradient
0.8 ~ • Taylor too 1.09
..-.. g A Hyperbolic ~o 0.93
U'l
E 0.6 "0
0 • Hyperbolic t 00 0.95
E
..._.. Load Step ~ • Asaoka
E
c • 2 to 4 kPa :G 1
<-0 0.4 :5
0
-z&- 4 to 8 kPa >-
.a
"0
0.2 -'V- 8 to 16 kPa ~
E
iw (b)
J 0
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 0 1 2

Observed (mm /s)

2
On-1 (mm) Cv

Fig. 9(a), (b). Comparison of dult and cv by hyperbolic and Asaoka

Fig. 8. Asaoka's plots for kaolin oedometer settlements methods with observed values for kaolin consolidation tests

Table 3. Determination of cv and duu for kaolin consolidation test using conventional, hyperbolic and Asaoka's methods

Load step Average ht. Casagrande's Taylor's Cvfrom t 50 Cvfrom t 90 Observed Outt
(kPa) (mm) tso (s) t 90 (s) (mm2 /s) (mm2 /s) (mm)
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)

2 to 4 25 240 864 0.513 0.613 1

4 to 8 24.3 249 1016 0.469 0.494 0.33

8 to 16 23.9 169 676 0.666 0.717 0.53

16 to 32 23.5 90 361 1.206 1.294 0.33

Hyperbolic Hyperbolic Cvfrom t60 Cvfrom t 90 Outr=0.821/ S;
Hyperbolic method t6o (s) t90 (s) (mm2 /s) (mm 2 /s) (mm)
(8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

2 to 4 25 329 960 0.545 0.552 1.02

4 to 8 24.3 383 1116 0.450 0.456 0.34

8 to 16 23.9 246 716 0.662 0.671 0.55

16 to 32 23.5 142 413 1.061 1.076 0.32

Lit Po Cv Ouu=flo/ (1-/)1)
Asaoka's method (s) (mm) /)I (mm2 /s) (mm)
(13) (14) (15) (16} (17}
2 to 4 25 30 0.078 0.921 0.721 0.98
4 to 8 24.3 30 0.021 0.936 0.529 0.33
8 to 16 23.9 30 0.052 0.901 0.805 0.53
16 to 32 23.5 30 0.049 0.840 1.298 0.31

NII-Electronic Library Service

38 TAN AND CHEW

ries with vertical drains where the hyperbolic method

COMPARISON USING FIELD VERTICAL DRAIN worked very well when comparing estimated to observed
CASES primary settlement. The same case histories are now
Unlike the laboratory cases whose results can be com- reproduced to compare the Asaoka procedure to the
pared to well established conventional procedures based hyperbolic method by comparing the estimates of both
on Terzaghi's one dimensional consolidation theory with settlement and in situ ch with observed values.
vertical drainage only, field cases are far more complex, The essential data describing the vertical drain and soil
with uncertain soil properties, boundaries and both verti- parameters that govern the consolidation behavior are
cal and radial flows where vertical drains are employed. given in Table 4. From this table, the ratios of n =DId,
As long as the process is one dimensional consolidation, HID and chI Cv can be computed for determining CXi from
both the hyperbolic and the Asaoka procedures should Fig. 3 for applying the hyperbolic procedure. The values
be applicable. Tan (1995) demonstrated some case histo- of Cv are obtained from high quality oedometer tests on
representative soils from the sites, while ch are obtained
from fitting the observed settlement to the Terzaghi-Bar-
20
20 kPa ron theory as shown for two typical cases in Figs. lO(a)
0
Ska-Edeby V13 (18 em sand drains at
e
~
-20
1.5 m Triangle) 20n=================~~k~P=a--------~

Clay 2H=10 m
tq_ 0~------------------------------~
c
(I) -40 cv=0.1, ch=0.3 m 2 /yr
Orebro (Geodrain at 1.1 m traingle)
s -theory -20
(I)

E(I) -60 _.data

e
~ -40
Clay H=7m
C/)
'0 cv:0.2, ch:0.5 m 2 /yr
-80 cf
(I)
-60
(a) s
(I) -80
-theory
-100
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 i +data (a)
C/) -100
Time, t (yr)
-120
0.14 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
+ Ska·Edeby V13 Time, t (month)
0.12
0.3
0.1 + Orebro-Geodrain 1.1 m

e(.)
0.08
0.25
-.::
~
t.() 0.06
'E o.2
';;;::;
~ 0.15
.§..
0.04
~ 0.1
0.02
(b)
0.05
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 (b)
Time, t (yr) 0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Time, t (month)
Asaoka's plotsforSka-Edeby V1 120 ..--------------------------.,
{18 em sand drain 1.5m trian e) Asaoka's plots of Orebro G11
80 for time increment of 0.25 (Geodrain at 1.1m triangle}
1 oo for time increment of 0.04

.-..
E
(,)
..........
60
-0
E
..........
80

60
t-0 40 c
"0
40

20
(c) (c)
/3o:6.61 __.,
a~--~----~----~---~---~ a~--~--~----~-~---~--~
0 20 40 60 80 1 00 0 20 40 60 80 100 120

On-1 (em) On-1 (em)

Fig. lO(a)-(c). Field settlement, hyperbolic and Asaoka plots for Ska- Fig. 11(a)-(c). Field settlement, hyperbolic and Asaoka plots for
Edeby V13 case history Orebro G11 case history

NII-Electronic Library Service

 PREDICTION OF CONSOLIDATION SETTLEMENT 39

Table 4. Description of vertical drain cases studied

Spacing Diam. Cv ch t5ult

Site Drains D(m) H{m)b
s (m)a d (m) {m2 /yr) (m2 /yr) (em)
(I) {2) (5) (6)
(3) (4) (7) (8) (9)
Sweden-SkaEdeby
V03 Sand 2.2T 0.18 2.31 IOD 0.15 0.45 59
V08 Sand 0.9T 0.18 0.945 IOD 0.05 0.15 50
V13 Sand 1.5T 0.18 1.575 IOD 0.1 0.3 75
Ali Sand 1.5T 0.18 1.575 10D 0.15 0.45 61
AIV No drain - - - 10D 1.1 - 43
Sweden-Orebro
011 Oeodrain 1.1T 0.065 1.155 7S 0.2 0.5 100
014 Oeodrain 1.4T 0.065 1.47 7S 0.2 0.6 100
S11 Sand 1.1T 0.18 1.155 7S 0.2 0.5 110
S14 Sand 1.4T 0.18 1.47 7S 0.2 0.6 110
Singapore
Changi Sand 2.5T 0.4 2.625 20D 1 3.2 100
CTE-SP2 OV drain 1.3T 0.06 1.365 6D 1 1.5 145
CTE-SP3 OV drain 1.1T 0.06 1.155 6D 1 1.25 155
Japan-Kobe
S6 Sand 2.0S 0.5 2.26 14D 3 3 74

a Drain spacing, T means triangular spacing (D= l.05s), S means square spacing (D= 1.13s)
b Clay thickness, S means single top drainage, D means double drainage

Table 5. Determination of a1, S1, t560 , t590 for hyperbolic method, and P0 , P1 for Asaoka's method
Hyperbolic method Asaoka's method
Site Drains Lit pl
(1) (2)
Slope Slope t56o t59o Po
Ol; s~ (em) (em) (yr) (em)
(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9)
Sweden-SkaEdeby
V03 Sand 0.777 0.013 34.6 52.6 0.25 4.77 0.919
V08 Sand 0.758 0.016 29.8 44.4 0.125 7.86 0.842
V13 Sand 0.767 0.01 46.3 68.9 0.25 12.11 0.839
Ali Sand 0.767 0.013 34.4 51.8 0.1 5.40 0.910
AIV No drain 0.824 0.02 25.2 37.8 0.1 1.37 0.967
Sweden-Orebro
011 Geodrain 0.763 0.008 57.1 89.5 0.042 6.61 0.937
014 Geodrain 0.766 0.008 58 87 0.042 5.18 0.948
Sll Sand 0.76 0.007 64.6 96.8 0.021 4.08 0.963
S14 Sand 0.762 0.007 62.4 93.7 0.042 5.94 0.943
Singapore
Changi Sand 0.748 0.008 58.5 87.7 0.014 4.60 0.955
CTE-SP2 OV drain 0.79 0.006 81.2 123 0.042 16.07 0.892
CTE-SP3 OV drain 0.785 0.005 93.7 142 0.042 26.94 0.826
Japan-Kobe
S6 Sand 0.78 0.011 42.8 64.2 0.014 8.32 0.889

For regression between t560 and t590 to obtain Po and P~> all the regression coefficients r 2> 0.995

NII-Electronic Library Service

40 TAN AND CHEW

Table 6. Comparison of ultimate primary settlement estimates using hyperbolic and Asaoka methods

Observed Hyperbolic estimates of Outt (ern) Asaoka

Site Drains
Outt (ern)
(1) (2) 1/Si cxi/ si S6o/0.6 S9o/0.9 Po/(1-/31)
(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)

Sweden-SkaEdeby
V03 Sand 59 76 59 58 58 59
V08 Sand 50 64 49 50 49 50
V13 Sand 75 100 76 77 77 75
All Sand 61 58 59 57 58 60
AIV No drain 43 51 42 42 42 41
Sweden-Orebro
011 Oeodrain 100 125 96 95 95 105
014 Oeodrain 100 128 97 97 97 100
Sll Sand 110 140 106 108 108 112
S14 Sand 110 138 105 104 104 105
Singapore
Changi Sand 100 130 98 97 97 102
CTE-SP2 OV drain 145 174 138 135 136 149
CTE-SP3 OV drain 155 201 158 156 158 154
Japan-Kobe
S6 Sand 74 92 72 71 71 75

Table 7. Comparison of consolidation coefficient estimates using hyperbolic and Asaoka methods

Observed Hyperbolic method Asaoka

Site Drains ch t6o ch f9o ch ch
(1) (2) (rn2 /yr) . (yr) (rn2 /yr) (yr) (rn2 /yr) (mz /yr)
(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)

Sweden-SkaEdeby
V03 Sand 0.45 2.45 0.38 6.54 0.38 0.41

V08 Sand 0.15 0.5 0.19 1.75 0.14 0.15

V13 Sand 0.3 1.43 0.26 3.71 0.26 0.32

All Sand 0.45 0.77 0.49 2.1 0.46 0.43

AIV No drain Cv= 1.10 6.51 Cv= 1.10 19.1 Cv= 1.10 Cv= 1.40

Sweden-Orebro
011 Oeodrain 0.5 0.62 0.5 1.49 0.53 0.55
014 Oeodrain 0.6 0.82 0.66 2.19 0.64 0.82

Sll Sand 0.5 0.54 0.31 1.54 0.28 0.35

S14 Sand 0.6 0.79 0.4 2.45 0.33 0.52
Singapore
Changi Sand 3.2 0.27 3.26 0.67 3.31 3.4
CTE-SP2 OV drain 1.5 0.32 1.19 0.71 1.5 1.52

CTE-SP3 OV drain 1.25 0.31 0.82 0.67 1.07 1.70

Japan-Kobe
S6 Sand 3 0.14 3.2 0.3 3.50 4.5

NII-Electronic Library Service

 PREDICTION OF CONSOLIDATION SETTLEMENT 41

and 11(a}, from which the most likely ch applicable is de- Similarly, a comparison of estimated in situ ch by the
termined. The settlement observed for the field cases are hyperbolic (using Eq. (9)) and Asaoka (using Eq. (14))
shown as hyperbolic and Asaoka plots in Figs. 10(b}, methods with observed values is made in Table 7, and
ll(b), 10(c) and ll(c). From such plots, the values of Si, plotted in Fig. 12(b). It is apparent that the hyperbolic
o6o, and c590 were determined for the hyperbolic method, method estimates agree with the observed values within
and the values of Po and P1 were determined for the an error of 5%, whereas the Asaoka's method overesti-
Asaoka method. These are summarized in Table 5. mates the value of ch by about 10%. This is consistent
Using the results presented in Table 5 and the theories with the results determined from the laboratory kaolin
discussed earlier, the ultimate primary settlement were studies.
computed for both the hyperbolic (using Eq. (5)) and
Asaoka (using Eq. (11)) methods and is shown in Table
6. In order to compare the various estimates, these are SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
plotted against the observed primary settlement in Fig. The theoretical basis for the hyperbolic and Asaoka ob-
12(a}. From this plot, it can be clearly shown that the servational methods for monitoring settlements due to
hyperbolic method proposed by Tan (1995) underesti- one dimensional consolidation with and without vertical
mates the primary settlement by less than 3%, whereas drains were described. It was determined that both the
the Asaoka method overestimates by less than 1%. The hyperbolic and Asaoka's methods require settlement
conventional hyperbolic method which was the inverse of data beyond the 60% consolidation stage in order to pro-
the hyperbolic slope would grossly overestimate primary vide accurate estimates of the ultimate primary consolida-
settlement by about 25%, which is unacceptable. tion settlement and the in situ consolidation coefficients.
One distinct advantage of the hyperbolic over the
Asaoka's method is the ease with which the hyperbolic
250~------------------------------~ method permits the identification of the different consoli-
'E dation stages because of the linearity between the 60%
.& (a) and 90% consolidation points. Although there have been
~ 200 • reports of the accuracy of Asaoka's method being strong-
0
.c ly dependent on the choice of time increment used, it was
Q)
E shown that for normal one dimensional consolidation set-
a; 150
tlement, no apparent influence of the choice of time incre-
.c
0 Gradient ment were observed using data from consolidation tests
>
.c o 1/S1 1.26 on kaolin specimens. Both the hyperbolic and Asaoka
"C 100
• 01..1s. o.97 methods gave very good predictions of ultimate primary
~ settlements for both laboratory oedometer tests on kao-
E v 1} 60 /0.6 0.97
m 50
• a,o/0.9 0.98
lin and field settlement for clays with vertical drains. The
agreement between the predicted and observed primary
• Asaoka 1.01 settlements are well within an error of 5%. Both the
0~----~----~----~------~----~ hyperbolic and Asaoka's methods can also be used to esti-
0 50 100 150 200 250
mate both laboratory and in situ consolidation
llu•u Observed primary settlement (em) coefficients. For this application, the error between
predicted and observed values would be larger compared
-~ (b)
to settlements, about 10%, with the hyperbolic method
underestimating and the Asaoka's method overestimat-
ing the consolidation coefficients. Based on this study, it
-(/) 4
"C
seems that both the hyperbolic and Asaoka methods can

-...
0 be applied effectively to monitor consolidation with verti-
.c:
Q) 3 cal drains, provided that the bulk of the settlement occur-
E
ring is due mainly to one dimensional primary consolida-

-
Q)
.c tion, and not secondary compression at constant effective
0
2 stress as in the case of the settlement of peat.
>
.c Gradien
"C e Hyperbolic t 60 0.98
Q)
a; 1 A Hyperbolic t11o 1.05 REFERENCES
E
~ 1.09
1) Asaoka, A. (1978): "Observational procedure of settlement predic-
w tions," Soils and Foundations, Vol. 18, No. 4, pp. 87-101.
0~----J-----~----~~----~----~ 2) Barron, R. A. (1948): "Consolidation of fine-grained soils by drain
0 1 2 3 4 5 wells," Trans ASCE, Vol. 113, pp. 718-754.
Observed ch (m 2 /yr) 3) Bergado, D., Asakami, H., Alfaro, M. C. and Balasubramaniam,
A. S. (1991): "Smear effects of vertical drains on soft Bangkok
Fig. 12(a), (b). Comparison of Ouu and Cv by hyperbolic and Asaoka clay," Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 117, No.
methods with observed values for vertical drain case histories 10, pp. 1509-1530.

NII-Electronic Library Service

42 TAN AND CHEW
4) Carrillo, N. (1942): "Simple two and three dimensional cases in the
theory of consolidation of soils," Journal of Mathematics and
Physics, Vol. 21, No. 1, Pt. 1, pp. 1-5.
5) Edil, T. B., Fox, P. J. and Lan, L. T. (1991): "Observational proce-
dure for settlement of peat," GEO-COAST'91, 3-6 September,
Yokohama, 2/4, pp. 165-170.
6) Hansbo, S. (1981): "Consolidation of fine-grained soils by prefabri-
cated drains," Paper 12/22: Proceedings of the lOth ICSMFE,
Stockholm, Sweden, Vol. 3, pp. 677-682.
7) Magnan, J.P. and Deroy, J. M. (1980): "Analyse graphique des
courbes de consolidation oedometrique," Bull. Laison Lab. Ponts
et Chausses, Paris, France, (in French), Vol. 9, pp. 53-56.
8) Sridharan, A. and Sreepada Rao, A. (1981): "Rectangular hyperbo-
la fitting method for one-dimensional consolidation," Geotech.
Testing Journal, Vol. 4, No. 4, pp. 161-168.
9) Sridharan, A., Murthy, N. S. and Prahash, K. (1987): "Rectangu-
lar hyperbola method of consolidation analysis," Geotechnique,
Vol. 37, No. 3, pp. 335-368.
10) Tan, S. A. (1993): "Ultimate settlement by hyperbolic plots for
clays with vertical drains," Journal of Geotechnical Engineering,
ASCE, Vol. 119, No. 5, pp. 950-956.
11) Tan, S. A. (1994): "Hyperbolic method for settlements in clays
with vertical drains," Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Vol. 31, pp.
125-131.
12) Tan, S. A. (1995): "Validation of hyperbolic method for settle-
ments in clays with vertical drains," Soils and Foundations, Vol.
35, No. 1, pp. 101-113.
NII-Electronic Library Service