Proceedings of the Institution of

Civil Engineers
Geotechnical Engineering 161
October 2008 Issue GE5
Pages 259–267
doi: 10.1680/geng.2008.161.5.259

Paper 800031
Received 25/06/2008
Accepted 20/07/2008
Keywords: embankments/
foundations/subsidence
Briony Rankine
Geotechnical Engineer,
Golder Associates, Brisbane,
Australia (formerly James
Cook University)
Buddluma Indraratna
Professor, School of Civil En-
gineering, University of Wol-
longong, Wollongong City,
Australia
Nagaratnam Sivakugan
Associate Professor, School
of Engineering, James Cook
University, Townsville, Aus-
tralia
Vasantha Wijeyakulasuriya
Principal Engineer, Queens-
land Department of Main R-
oads, Brisbane, Australia
Cholachat Rujikiatkamjorn
Research Fellow, School of
Civil Engineering, University
of Wollongong, Wollongong
City, Australia

Foundation behaviour below an embankment on soft soils

B. R. Rankine BEng (Hons), PhD, B. Indraratna PhD, DIC, FIEAust, FASCE, FGS, FIES, MIMMM, MAUSIMM, N. Sivakugan
PhD, MASCE, FIEAust, CPEng, RPEQ, V. Wijeyakulasuriya MEng, MIEAust and C. Rujikiatkamjorn BEng (Hons), PhD

The Sunshine Motorway is one of the major traffic º slope of isotropic consolidation line (Cam Clay
corridors that service the South East region of parameter)
Queensland, Australia. Initial investigations for the  Poisson’s ratio
construction of pavements in area 2, stage 2 of the r dry density
motorway began in late 1990. Large areas of soft, highly 9 friction angle
compressible organic clays were found to exist over the
length of the upgrade. Also, because the topography of
1. INTRODUCTION
the proposed alignment was mostly low lying,
Located approximately 100 km north of Brisbane, the Sunshine
earthworks were required over a large portion of the
Coast is one of Queensland’s main tourist attractions, and one
route. Prior to any earthworks for the stage being
of Australia’s fastest-growing regions, recording a high rate of
undertaken, a trial embankment was constructed in the
annual population growth of 3.6%, that is, approximately
area to provide an understanding of the foundation
500 000 by the end of 2021. As one of the major carriageways
behaviour and to also ensure the overall success of the
for the region, the Sunshine Coast Motorway provides an
project. The finite difference code FLAC was employed
integral part of the South East Queensland road network, and
to investigate the performance of the full-scale trial
not surprisingly is one of the key development projects for the
embankment, and the underlying soft clay. Predictions of
Queensland Department of Main Roads (Main Roads). A
the excess pore pressure and both vertical and lateral
proposed route alignment through Area 2 of the second stage
displacements are made and compared with field
of the motorway (Fig. 1) was fixed in October 1990, and the
observations.
total length of this section is approximately 4.7 km. The
topography to be traversed within this stage of the motorway
NOTATION
was predominantly low lying (less than 1 m above sea level),
B equivalent unit cell width (plane strain case)
requiring significant earthworks along the majority of the
bs equivalent smear radius (plane strain case)
route. Embankment construction was mainly in the order of
bw equivalent radius of drain (plane strain case)
c9 cohesion
E elastic modulus
N
G elastic shear modulus
Kmax maximum elastic bulk modulus
khp plane strain horizontal permeability
kh axi-symmetric horizontal permeability (Not to scale)
khp ’ plane strain horizontal permeability in smear zone
kh ’ axi-symmetric horizontal permeability in smear zone
kv average vertical permeability Study area
M frictional constant (Cam clay parameter) Brisbane
n spacing ratio, R/rw
R radius of influence zone for each drain (axisymmetric
case)
rs radius of smear zone (axisymmetric case)
rw radius of drain (axisymmetric case)
s smear ratio, rs /rw
v0 initial specific volume
vcs critical specific volume at 1 Pa
Æ,
geometric parameters defined in equations (2)
Fig. 1. Map showing approximate location of area 2, stage 2, of
and (3) the Sunshine Motorway
k slope of isotropic swelling line (Cam clay parameter)

Geotechnical Engineering 161 Issue GE5 Foundation behaviour below an embankment on soft soils Rankine et al. 259

Downloaded by [ NEW YORK UNIVERSITY] on [17/09/16]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 2–3 m in height, but increased up to 7 m or more on the
approach to various structures along the route.
Initial site investigations were used primarily for the purpose of
profiling the soil conditions along the proposed route. These
tests showed that the original alignment would inevitably cross
over large sections of highly compressible soft marine clays
(undrained shear strength less than 10 kPa). Road
embankments constructed on soft soils are often subjected to
large deformations, and can be rendered unserviceable owing
to excessive settlements. Following careful consideration, the
proposed development path was moved further east, and a new
alignment was fixed in December 1990. Additional
geotechnical investigations undertaken along this new
alignment showed that although soft clays were still traversed
along the changed route, the area being crossed had been
significantly reduced.
Given the geotechnical problems expected in an area with a
large proportion of soft clay to be traversed, a trial
embankment was built to ensure the overall success of the
project. This fully instrumented embankment (maximum height
2.85 m) allowed the soft clay foundation behaviour to be
observed, and the parameters to be established for preliminary
design to be verified. More significantly, this embankment
provided a means of evaluating the effectiveness of
prefabricated vertical drains (PVD). Construction was
undertaken in multiple lifts over a period of approximately 2
months. PVDs were installed in a triangular pattern underneath
two separate sections of the embankment.
This paper describes the predicted and measured behaviour of
the embankment and the underlying soft clay foundation. Field
behaviour was simulated using a fully coupled Biot
consolidation model, and the modified Cam clay theory was
adopted for all clay layers, except for the weathered surface
crust and the sand layer, which were modelled according to the
Mohr–Coulomb theory. The effectiveness of PVDs was
evaluated on the basis of excess pore pressure dissipation and
both the vertical and lateral displacements below the
embankment.
2. GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS
Because of the large amounts of earthworks required, an
extensive in situ and laboratory testing schedule was
undertaken by Queensland Department of Main Roads 1–3 to
profile the soils. The total scope of the investigation included
(a) 48 drill boreholes*
(b) 10 electric static friction cone penetrometer tests
(c) 64 standard bridge probes†
(d ) 6 inspection trenches.
Standard penetration testing (SPT), vane shear tests and
undisturbed soils sampling were also undertaken at boreholes
drilled close to the pier or abutment locations. Boreholes were
extended until the bedrock had been cored to a depth of 3 m.
* In some cases, holes were redrilled to obtain additional samples. The additional
samples were identified using prefixes (e.g. DH5A).
† Several probes were redone. These probes were identified using suffixes (e.g.
P15B).
260 Geotechnical Engineering 161 Issue GE5 Foundation behaviour below an embankment on soft soils
Downloaded by [ NEW YORK UNIVERSITY] on [17/09/16]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
Additionally, in situ shear vanes were conducted along the
entire length of the proposed route. The recovered samples had
a diameter of either 50 mm or 75 mm, and were individually
tested to obtain their index properties, organic content, natural
moisture content, and particle size distribution curves.
Additionally, unconsolidated undrained, isotropically
consolidated undrained and consolidated-drained triaxial tests
were performed on selected soft clay samples.
3. SUBSOIL CONDITIONS
Because of the limited amount of testing undertaken along the
final alignment, soil properties were estimated using results
from laboratory and field testing carried out along both the
new and the old alignments. A typical soil profile within area
2, Stage 2 of the Sunshine Motorway is shown in Fig. 2. As
shown, testing revealed the existence of a 0.5 m thick
weathered crust above 10 m of silty clay (with the exception of
Section A, in which the crust extended further to a depth of
1.5 m). Laboratory testing conducted on this clay layer
indicated that it could be divided into three sublayers. The
uppermost of these layers exhibited an average water content
of 82% and an approximate liquid limit of 60%. The middle
layer of clay was more plastic than the upper layer, and
exhibited average water content and liquid limit values of 90%
and 65% respectively. The bottom layer of clay had the same
plasticity as the upper layer of clay, with averaged water
content and liquid limit of approximately 75% and 66%
respectively. Wijekulasuriya et al. 4 noted that the liquidity
index did not exceed 2 for all soil layers below the weathered
crust, indicating a non-sensitive nature. This suggests the soils
were very soft clay, with relatively high organic content
(5–10%). Further underlying this soft clay was a clayey sand
layer that extended to a depth of approximately 16 m below
the ground level.
Although many types of soft clay are normally consolidated,
overconsolidation can sometimes occur close to the soil surface
because of weathering, erosion or desiccation (Fig. 2). The
overconsolidation ratio (OCR) was determined from results
obtained from the standard oedometer testing. It was also
observed that the unit weight of the clay was fairly consistent
with depth, ranging between 13.9 kN/m3 and 15.7 kN/m3 , with
the exception of the topmost overconsolidated crust, which
measured 17.4 kN/m3 . Interestingly, the average specific
gravity for all five layers varied between 2.48 and 2.63. These
values are lower than the range normally expected for clayey
soils (usually around 2.65), and can be attributed to the
presence of organics within the soil. Average values of organic
content reported by Litwinowicz et al.5 range between 4.8%
and 10.7% for layers within 10 m below the ground level.
Undisturbed samples used in evaluating the subsoil conditions
were taken in both the vertical and horizontal directions.
Consolidation (oedometer) tests were also undertaken on both
vertically and horizontally oriented specimens. To obtain an
indication of the permeability anisotropy, the average
horizontal permeability was divided by the average vertical
permeability, giving a kh /kv ratio of 2.85. Such anisotropy in
permeability is comparable to observations made by other
researchers for marine clays of similar properties (e.g. Bo et
al.6 ). For selected specimens, Table 1 details the permeability
coefficients in the horizontal and vertical directions.
Rankine et al.
 Description OCR Unit weight, Water Index properties
parameters and calculation
γ: kN/m3 content: % methods. 4 The trial
0 5 10 15 0 50 embankment considered in
0·0 m
Weathered this paper, more specifically,
0·5 m 17·4 LL ⫽ 60, PI ⫽ 27,
crust
LI ⫽ 0·33 was constructed to
Silty
clay 13·9 LL ⫽ 60, PI ⫽ 30,
LI ⫽ 1·73 (a) assess the feasibility and
2·5 m
stability of staged
Silty construction of the
clay 14·0 LL ⫽ 65, PI ⫽ 42,
LI ⫽ 1·60
embankment,
5·0 m (b) assess the effectiveness of
the mandrel driven PVDs
15·1 (c) verify the compressibility
and consolidation
Silty LL ⫽ 36, PI ⫽ 42,
clay LI ⫽ 1·34 characteristics assumed
for design calculations.

15·7
The overall design of the trial
embankment, shown in Fig.
10·5 m
3, comprised three sections,
referred to in this paper as
sections A, B and C. The two
Sand 17·5 primary sections (sections A
and B) were 35 m long.
section A represented the
design case (vertical drains
installed at 1 m spacing) and
16·0 m section B was the control (i.e.
undisturbed virgin ground
Fig. 2. Typical soil profile beneath Area 2, Stage 2, of the Sunshine Motorway
with only preloading
applied). Section C,
measuring 20 m, was used as
Soil properties established through laboratory and in situ an intermediate case with PVDs installed at 2 m spacing.
testing were unique to this project, and differed substantially Installation of vertical drains was in a triangular grid
from any other soils encountered previously by Main Roads. arrangement, and to a depth of 10 m (for both sections), close
This warranted the construction of a trial embankment to to the bottom of the silty clay layer, implying upward
observe the real foundation behaviour, and also to verify the drainage. In conjunction with section A, section C was used to
design parameters previously established. In order to ensure assess the influence of drain spacing and the suitability of
effective subsurface drainage of the motorway, PVDs were PVDs to accelerate consolidation and facilitate embankment
chosen as the method of ground improvement below the construction on Sunshine Coast soft clay.
surcharge loading and two different drain spacings (1 m and
2 m) were implemented. The nominal crest width and height of all sections of the
embankment were 17 m and 2.85 m respectively. Berms were
constructed to widths of 5 m on the instrumented side of the
4. FULL-SCALE TRIAL EMBANKMENT embankment and to 8 m on the opposite side. The height of all
An observational approach, based on performance monitoring, berms was approximately 1 m. Construction of the
is generally undertaken by Main Roads to address issues embankment was carried out using a multi-staged approach
associated with uncertainties in ground conditions, design (Fig. 4).

Section ID Parameter Soil layer

Layer 1 2 3 4 5

Description Weathered Silty clay Silty clay Silty clay Clayey sand
crust

Depth: m 0–0.5 0.5–2.5 2.5–5.0 5.0–10.5 10.5–16.0

All sections Vertical permeability, kv : m/s 3.8 3 10
8 4.1 3 10
8 3.3 3 10
8 9.4 3 10
9 7.8 3 10
8
Horizontal permeability, kh : m/s 6.3 3 10
8 6.8 3 10
8 5.4 3 10
8 1.5 3 10
8 1.3 3 10
7

Table 1. Permeability coefficients for untreated foundation soils

Geotechnical Engineering 161 Issue GE5 Foundation behaviour below an embankment on soft soils Rankine et al. 261

Downloaded by [ NEW YORK UNIVERSITY] on [17/09/16]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 program. A fully coupled Biot consolidation model was
adopted to mimic the soft clay foundation behaviour below the
embankment. This type of model has been found by other
CL A B C researchers, including Indraratna et al.,8 to provide a realistic
representation of the actual field behaviour of soft clays.

Design case Control case Intermediate case The modified Cam-clay constitutive model, derived by Roscoe
drains at 1 m No drains drains at 2 m
spacing spacing and Burland, 9 was used to describe each of the clay sublayers
(a) (excluding the crust). Parameters required for this model
include the gradients of volume against natural log mean
CL
effective stress relations for consolidation and swelling (º and
5 m 2·6 m 8·5 m 8·5 m 2·5 m 8m k respectively), the frictional constant (M), the specific volume
at unit mean effective stress (1 Pa) on the CSL (vcs ), the density
1·85 m IC5 IA1
1·0 m IB3 SCA1, SCB3, SCC5 (r)˜, the elastic shear modulus (G) and the maximum elastic
bulk modulus (Kmax ). The crust and remaining sand layer were
5·0 m modelled assuming Mohr–Coulomb constitutive behaviour.
Values for the parameters used in both types of foundation
PVA 10 PVA4 model are shown in Table 2.
5·0 m
PVC39 PVB22
PVB32
The geometry and response of PVDs are three-dimensional
PPC45
(axisymmetric). However, for the purpose of computational
5·0 m
efficiency, the analyses of most multi-drain systems can be
conducted using an equivalent plane-strain model. 10–14
(b) Conversion to equivalent plane strain is achieved by
transforming the vertical drain system into a set of equivalent
Fig. 3. Sketch depicting design of trial embankment and drain walls, which can be achieved through geometric and/or
instrumentation layout: (a) plan view; (b) elevation view
permeability matching. 8,14–16

For the treated soil, horizontal permeabilities were calculated

4·0
using the method outlined by Indraratna and Redana. 14 Using
Section A this method, the plane-strain ratio of smear zone horizontal
3·5
Section B permeability k9hp to the undisturbed horizontal permeability khp
3·0
Section C is given by
Fill height: m

2·5
2·0
k9hp

¼ 
1·5 1 khp khp = kh [ln ð n=sÞþð kh =k9h Þln ð sÞ
0:75]
Æg
1·0
0·5
0 where n is the spacing ratio (R/rw ), s is the smear ratio (rs /rw ),
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 43 46 50 55
rs is the radius of the smear zone, rw is the radius of the drain,
Time: days
and R is the radius of the influence zone for each drain
(¼ 1.05 3 drain spacing for triangular grid arrangement).
Fig. 4. Actual construction sequence for trial embankment
sections
The geometric parameters Æ and
are defined as
 
The layout of instrumentation below the embankment was 2 2bs bs b2
designed to optimise the range of equipment installed without 2 Ƽ
1
þ s2
3 B B 3B
sacrificing the quality and extent of information being
obtained, whereby the bulk of instruments were placed on one
half of the embankment cross-section. The instrumentation 1 bs

3
¼ ð bs
bw Þ2 þ 3 3b2w
b2s
included inclinometers, settlement gauges, horizontal profile B2 3B
gauges, piezometers (pneumatic, standpipe and vibrating wire)
and earth pressure cells. The locations of each of the Parameters from equations (1)–(3) are defined
piezometers (PP ¼ pneumatic, PV ¼ vibrating wire), settlement diagrammatically in Fig. 5.
gauges (SC) and inclinometers (I) are shown in Fig. 3, and the
recorded filed data were used to verify the numerical model Well resistance is not significant when the drains have very
predictions, as explained below. high discharge capacity. Thanks to the modern-day
manufacture of PVDs, their discharge capacity can be assumed
5. NUMERICAL MODELLING to be large enough to ignore any well resistance compared with
A numerical analysis of the trial embankment from this case the smear effect.
study was undertaken using the two-dimensional finite
difference package FLAC, 7 which is an explicit finite difference In this study, the extent of the smear was taken as five times

262 Geotechnical Engineering 161 Issue GE5 Foundation behaviour below an embankment on soft soils Rankine et al.

Downloaded by [ NEW YORK UNIVERSITY] on [17/09/16]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 Parameter Method of testing Soil layer

Layer 1 2 3 4 5

Description Weathered Silty clay Silty clay Silty clay Clayey sand
crust

Depth: m 0–0.5 0.5–2.5 2.5–5.0 5.0–10.5 10.5–16.0

Model MC 1 MCC 2 MCC MCC MC

º Oedometer test 0.27 0.48 0.27

k Oedometer test 0.013 0.016 0.013
Slope, M Standard penetration 1.2 1.2 1.06
test
Critical specific Triaxial tests 5.5 7.4 5.6
volume at 1 Pa, vcs
Initial specific Oedometer test 3.2 3.1 2.9
volume, v0
Poisson’s ratio,  0.3 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.3
Dry density, r: kg/m3 1249 850 725 1000 1280
Elastic modulus, E: Oedometer test 23.4 7.8
MPa
Shear modulus, G: 9 3
MPa
Cohesion, c9: kPa Vane shear test 13.5 13.5
Friction angle, 9: Standard penetration 35.0 35.0
degrees test

Table 2. Parameters used in FLAC analysis

and are detailed further in Table 3 for both the undisturbed and
smeared sections of the affected foundation layers.

Drain The basic finite difference grid used to compute lateral and
vertical displacements, as well as excess pore water pressure,
Smear zone
for this study is shown in Fig. 6. The soil was modelled to a
l rw bw l depth of 16 m. This boundary was assumed as rigid, and the
rs bs soil below as dense enough to neglect any deformations
associated with it. This bottom boundary was further assumed
R B
to be non-draining, while the uppermost was assumed to be
freely draining.

The lateral boundaries of the finite difference mesh were fixed

at 150 m from the centreline. By exceeding the vertical
boundary dimension by at least five times, it was possible to
minimise boundary effects. The mesh density was increased
below the embankment to improve the computational
D 2B accuracy. In order to include the smear zones, the mesh was
(a) (b)
adjusted slightly for each of the sections up to 10 m deep,
which is the vertical drain installation depth. Prior to full
Fig. 5. Conversion of an axisymmetric unit cell into plane multi-drain simulation of each section, a single cell model was
strain: 16 (a) axisymmetric case; (b) plane-strain case run and calibrated for establishing the relevant soil layer
properties. The total width of the embankment modelled was
35 m.
the equivalent radius of the drain. 17 Permeability within the
undisturbed region can be derived by ignoring all smear and In the numerical model, the groundwater table was assumed at
well resistance terms, and is given by the ground surface, although the results from standpipe
piezometers installed in the trial embankment indicated a slight
variability in the height of the water table. The embankment
khp 0:67 was modelled using a Mohr–Coulomb model. The soil
4 ¼
kh ln ð nÞ
0:75 parameters of the embankment fill are shown in Table 4. The
rate of construction simulated in the model followed the actual
construction sequence (Fig. 4). Owing to the lack of symmetry
Base permeability values were established using this method, along the centreline of the embankment sections, it was

Geotechnical Engineering 161 Issue GE5 Foundation behaviour below an embankment on soft soils Rankine et al. 263

Downloaded by [ NEW YORK UNIVERSITY] on [17/09/16]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 Section Parameter Soil layer
ID
Layer 1 2 3 4

Description Weathered crust Silty clay Silty clay Silty clay

Depth: m 0–0.5 0.5–2.5 2.5–5.0 5.0–10.5

A Plane-strain horizontal 5.3 3 10
8 7.0 3 10
8 5.6 3 10
8 1.6 3 10
9
permeability (no smear), khp(SA) :
m/s
Plane-strain horizontal 1.6 3 10
9 2.1 3 10
8 1.7 3 10
9 4.8 3 10
9
permeability (with smear), k9hp(SA) :
m/s
C Plane-strain horizontal 4.2 3 10
8 5.5 3 10
8 4.3 3 10
8 1.2 3 10
8
permeability (no smear): khp(SC) :
m/s
Plane-strain horizontal 1.1 3 10
8 1.5 3 10
8 1.2 3 10
8 3.4 3 10
8
permeability (with smear), k9hp(SC) :
m/s

Table 3. Plane-strain permeability values for subsoil layers treated by PVDs

this ‘solve command’ were initialised back to zero prior to the

first embankment loading.
Ground surface
6. ANALYSIS OF RESULTS
Actual field measurements of the foundation response were
Smear
monitored by Queensland Department of Main Roads.1–3 These
10 m
zone field measurements of surface settlements, pore water
pressures, and lateral displacement are compared with the
values obtained from the modelling exercise in the following
6m sections.

6.1. Excess pore pressures

Drain spacing/2
Fig. 6. Finite difference mesh for full embankment analysis
(main) and unit cell analysis (subset)
Pore pressure generation was analysed at two separate
locations within each section. Piezometers PPA4, PVA10,
PVB28, PVB32, PVC39 and PPC45 were selected for
comparison. The locations of these piezometers were shown in
Fig. 3. Plots of pore pressure variation against time for each of
the piezometers are given in Fig. 7.

Parameter Value Excess pore pressures were estimated extremely well for the
initial stages of sections B and C, but a slight overestimation of
pressures was observed for section A. The maximum deviation
Dry density, r: kg/m3 2039
Shear modulus, G: MPa 10 between the observed and predicted pore pressures within these
Cohesion, c9: kPa 10 stages occurred at PVA4, and measured approximately 10 kPa.
Friction angle, : degrees 32 This overestimation is hypothesised to be an effect of excessive
Poisson’s ratio,  0.25 groundwater pumping from machinery installing adjacent
instrumentation or vertical drains. The overall maximum
Table 4. Mohr–Coulomb parameters of embankment fill excess pore pressures achieved following these initial loading
stages were also predicted well, with a discrepancy of only
5 kPa observable at the point of maximum pore pressure.

necessary to model the whole width of the embankment for
each simulation.
To account for the multiple layering within each of these
models, and to ensure equilibrium, gravity was switched on
following the specification of all initial in situ stress with
K0 ¼ 0.5 and pore water pressures, and all models were iterated
to the unbalanced force of 0.1%. Displacements resulting from
Significant disparity can be seen with regard to the rate of
dissipation present for the treated sections of the embankment.
This difference is believed to be due primarily to a
phenomenon known as the Mandel–Cryer effect. This effect is
characterised by stress redistribution associated with large
lateral strains, where the increase in localised stresses in some
regions of the soils due to stress redistribution can in fact
generate additional pore pressures, hence mimicking the effect

264 Geotechnical Engineering 161 Issue GE5 Foundation behaviour below an embankment on soft soils Rankine et al.

Downloaded by [ NEW YORK UNIVERSITY] on [17/09/16]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 100·00 Time: days
90·00 PVA4 (actual) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
Excess pore pressure: kPa 0
PVA4 (predicted)
80·00 ⫺100
PVA10 (actual)
70·00 PVA10 (predicted) ⫺200

Settlement: mm
60·00 ⫺300
50·00 ⫺400
40·00 ⫺500 Section A (actual)
30·00 Section A (predicted)
⫺600 Section B (actual)
20·00 ⫺700 Section B (predicted)
Section C (actual)
10·00 ⫺800 Section C (predicted)
0 ⫺900
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Time: days
(a) Fig. 8. Settlement plot for gauges SCA1, SCB3 and SCC5
during the embankment construction phase
100·00
Excess pore water pressure: kPa

90·00 PVB32 (actual)

PVB32 (predicted)
80·00
PVB28 (actual)
70·00 PVB28 (predicted) As clearly demonstrated, the magnitudes of vertical settlement
60·00 under the embankment are generally well computed. Slight
50·00
underestimations and overestimations were predicted for
40·00
sections A and C respectively. As expected, the treated sections
30·00
displayed a faster consolidation rate than the untreated section
20·00
Drilling nearby B. Furthermore, the settlement consolidation rate for section A,
10·00
in which the drains were spaced at 1 m, was quicker than for
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 section C, which was treated with drains at 2 m spacing.
Time: days
However. the difference between values (both predicted and
(b)
observed) for sections A and C was minimal, and thus any
100·00 benefit derived from installing the vertical drains at spacing
90·00 PVB39 (actual) closer than 2 m is negligible, as the smear effect produced by
Excess pore pressure: kPa

PVB39 (predicted)
80·00 PVB45 (actual) drain installation largely negates it. The divergence observed
70·00 PVB45 (predicted) between the predicted settlement–time relationships for the
60·00 treated sections is greater than that shown by the field
50·00 readings. This may be due to physical problems with the
40·00
vertical drains installed (i.e. kinking and/or clogging of the
30·00
drain), but is more likely to be due to the differences with the
20·00
smear effects assumed from drain installation.
10·00
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 6.3. Lateral displacements
Time: days
The predicted and measured lateral soil deformations were
(c)
measured for inclinometers IA1, IB3 and IC5 (locations shown
Fig. 7. Excess pore water pressure variation: (a) Section A; (b) in Fig. 3). Displacements have been compared at 69 days (end
Section B; (c) Section C of construction) for all three sections. Inclinometer
displacement profiles for measured and predicted results in
each of the sections are shown in Fig. 9.

of retarded pore water pressure dissipation. 18–20 Such a It is observed that the maximum lateral movement below the
phenomenon has been observed in the development of excess embankment was predicted well, with only slight
pore water pressures in thick deposits of normally consolidated overestimation for sections A and C, and only slight
clays, and similarly below various surcharge loadings, underestimation for section B. The predicted displacement
including trial embankments built upon soft clays from the profiles for sections A and B also compared favourably when
Muar Plains, Malaysia. 21 evaluated with respect to that measured in the field. These
inclinometers were installed 10 m left of the centreline. A less
favourable comparison was found for section C: although the
6.2. Surface settlements maximum lateral displacement was predicted reasonably, the
Comparisons of predicted and observed surface settlement were displacement profile generated by the model was quite
made for each of the three sections. The points selected for different from that which occurred in the field. Errors in the
comparison were located at settlement gauges SCA1 (section prediction of lateral movement for section C may be partly due
A), SCB3 (section B) and SCC5 (section C). Gauges SCA1 and to the corner effects of the embankment. These are not properly
SCB3 were located under the centreline of the embankment, modelled in two-dimensional plane strain. Such effects would
and at SCC5, 1 m left of the centreline (see Fig. 3). Fig. 8 shows be less of a concern for inclinometers IA1 and IB3, as they are
the predicted and observed settlements for each embankment located away from the toe of the embankment. However, the
section. inclinometer in section C, IC5, was located at the toe of the

Geotechnical Engineering 161 Issue GE5 Foundation behaviour below an embankment on soft soils Rankine et al. 265

Downloaded by [ NEW YORK UNIVERSITY] on [17/09/16]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 Lateral displacement: mm
embankment was constructed using a multi-staged approach,
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 and three separate sections were considered. These sections
0
represented the design case (vertical drains installed at 2 m
⫺2 spacing), a control case (virgin undisturbed soil) and an
⫺4 intermediate case (vertical drains installed at 1 m spacing). A
⫺6 fully coupled plane-strain analysis of each of these sections
Depth: m

⫺8 was carried out and compared with in situ measurements.

⫺10
The deviations between the measured field measurements and
⫺12
IA1 (actual) the excess pore water pressures predicted by the numerical
⫺14 IA1 (predicted)
model for each section were considered acceptable, given the
⫺16 limitations of the equivalent plane-strain analysis and the
(a)
underlying assumptions. The reduced pore pressure dissipation
Lateral displacement: mm
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
in the field, in contrast to the FEM predictions, implies that the
0 smear effect around the drains was probably more extensive
⫺2 than had been assumed in the numerical analysis. If vertical
⫺4 drains are installed too close to each other (e.g. 1 m spacing in
⫺6
this case), Walker and Indraratna 23 demonstrate that the rate of
Depth: m

pore water dissipation can be further affected by overlapping

⫺8
smear zones. In general, the installation of PVDs will certainly
⫺10
accelerate the excess pore pressure dissipation upon application
⫺12 of the surcharge load. The maximum deviation between
IB3 (actual)
⫺14 IB3 (predicted) observed and predicted excess pore pressure occurred at PVC44
⫺16 at 60 days. Maximum deviations in sections A and C were
(b)
predicted at 60 days and 75 days respectively. With the
Lateral displacement: mm exception of PVC44, excess pore water pressure was slightly
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120
0 overestimated for each of the prediction points. Discrepancies
⫺2 between measured and predicted pore pressures may have been
due to disparities between the actual and assumed loading
⫺4
conditions, or disparities related to the clay permeabilities
⫺6
Depth: m

employed in the numerical analysis.

⫺8
⫺10
⫺12
⫺14
⫺16 (c)
Fig. 9. Lateral displacement profiles for inclinometers: (a) IA1
(Section A); (b) IB3 (Section B); (c) IC5 (Section C)
embankment, and would be subjected to subjected to such
effects in the field.
Also, anisotropy of the mechanical properties of the soil may
have contributed to differences between the predicted and
measured lateral deformation. Inability to input such
directional variation is one of the major drawbacks of the Cam
clay model. 22
7. CONCLUSIONS
This paper presents a classic case history of a trial embankment
built on soft, organic marine clay in Area 2A of the Sunshine
Coast Motorway in South East Queensland, Australia. It details
both the pore pressure response and the vertical and lateral
deformations produced during the construction of a fully
instrumented trial embankment. The trial embankment was
used to assess the feasibility and stability of staged
construction of the embankment, to assess the effectiveness of
installing prefabricated vertical drains, and to verify the
compressibility and consolidation characteristics. The
The numerical model predictions of surface settlement were in
excellent agreement with the field measurements. Both
IC5 (actual)
IC5 (predicted) numerical and field measurements showed that reducing the
drain spacing from 2 m (Section C) to 1 m (section A) has no
significant difference on the settlement at any time. The
vertical drains with 2 m spacing were chosen in this project. It
should be noted that the presence of drains, irrespective of the
spacing, has no effect on the final magnitude of the
consolidation settlement; it only has an effect in hastening the
rate of settlement.
The magnitude of maximum lateral displacement was predicted
well by all three sections; however, although the displacement
profile for sections A and B compared favourably with the
movements measured in the field, the profile for section C
differed significantly from the field profile. This difference may
be due to the positioning of each of the inclinometers. IC5 was
located at the embankment toe. This inclinometer would be
subjected to corner effects from the embankment. Such effects
are not properly modelled by a two-dimensional plane-strain
analysis. There would not be as significant an effect on the
inclinometers IA1 and IB3 due to their positioning (10 m left of
the centreline).
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors wish to thank the materials and geotechnical
services branch of the Department of Main Roads Queensland,
for their assistance in the provision of field data for this case
study. The financial assistance provided by DEST as a part of
ARC-Linkage project is also gratefully acknowledged.

266 Geotechnical Engineering 161 Issue GE5 Foundation behaviour below an embankment on soft soils Rankine et al.

Downloaded by [ NEW YORK UNIVERSITY] on [17/09/16]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 REFERENCES
1. QUEENSLAND DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT. Sunshine Motorway
Stage 2: Area 2 Geotechnical Investigation. Queensland
Department of Transport, 1991, Materials and Geotechnical
Services Branch Report No. R1765, Brisbane, Australia.
2. QUEENSLAND DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT. Sunshine Motorway
Stage 2: Area 2 Geotechnical Design Report. Queensland
Department of Transport, 1991, Materials and Geotechnical
Services Branch Report No. R1770, Brisbane, Australia.
3. QUEENSLAND DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT. Sunshine Motorway
Stage 2: Interim Report on the Performance of the Trial
Embankment Area 2A (Ch 28490–28640). Queensland
Department of Transport, 1992, Materials and Geotechnical
Services Branch Report No. R1802, Brisbane, Australia.
4. WIJEYAKULASURIYA V., HOBBS G. and BRANDON A. Some
experiences with performance monitoring of embankments
on soft clays, Proceedings of the 8th ANZ Conference on
Geomechanics, Hobart, 1999 (preprint).
5. LITWINOWICZ A., WIJEYAKULASURIYA C. V. and BRANDON A. N.
Performance of a reinforced embankment on a sensitive
soft clay foundation. Proceedings of the 5th IGS
Conference, Singapore, 1995, 11–16
6. BO M. W., CHU J., LOW B. K. and CHOA V. 2003. Soil
Improvement: Prefabricated Vertical Drain Techniques.
Thompson Learning, Singapore, 2003.
7. ITASCA. 2005. FLAC 5.0 Users Guide. Itasca Consulting
Group, Minneapolis, MN, 2005.
8. INDRARATNA B., BALASUBRAMANIAM A. and SIVANESWARAN N.
Analysis of settlement and lateral deformation of soft clay
foundation beneath two full-scale embankments.
International Journal of Numerical and Analytical Methods
in Geomechanics, 1997, 21, No. 9, 599–618.
9. ROSCOE K. H. and BURLAND J. B. 1968. On the generalised
stress–strain behaviour of wet clay. In Engineering
Plasticity (HEYMAN J. and LECKIE F. A. (eds)), Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, 1968, pp. 535–609.
10. BERGADO D. T. and LONG P. V. Numerical analysis of
embankment on subsiding ground improved by vertical
drains and granular piles. Proceedings of the 13th
International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation
Engineering, New Delhi, 1994, 1361–1366.
11. BERGADO D. T., ASAKAMI H., ALFARA M. C. and
BALASUBRAMANIAM A. S. Smear effects of vertical drains on
soft Bangkok clay. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering,
ASCE, 1991, 117, No. 10, 1509–1530.
12. CHAI J. C. and MIURA N. Method of modelling vertical drain
improved subsoil. Proceedings of the China–Japan Joint
Symposium on Recent Developments of Theory and Practice
in Geotechnology, Shanghai, 1997, pp. 1–8.
13. INDRARATNA B. and REDANA I. W. Laboratory determination of
smear zone due to vertical drain installation. Journal of
Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE, 1998, 124, No. 2, 474–478.
14. INDRARATNA B. and REDANA I. W. Numerical modelling of
vertical drains with smear and well resistance installed in
soft clay. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 2000, 37, No. 1,
132–145.
15. HIRD C. C., PYRAH I. C. and RUSSELL D. Finite element
modelling of vertical drains beneath embankments on soft
ground. Géotechnique, 1992, 42, No. 3, 499–511.
16. INDRARATNA B. and REDANA I. W. Plane strain modelling of
smear effects associated with vertical drains. Journal of
Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, ASCE,
1997, 123, No. 5, 474–478.
17. REDANA I. W. Effectiveness of Vertical Drains in Soft Clay
with Special Reference to Smear Effects. PhD thesis,
University of Wollongong, 1999.
18. MANDEL J. Etude mathématique de la consolidation des
sols. Actes due Colloque International de Mechanique,
Poitier, 1950, Vol. 4, pp. 9–19.
19. MANDEL J. Consolidation des sols (étude mathématique).
Géotechnique, 1953, 3, No. 7, 287–299.
20. CRYER C. W. A comparison of the 3-dimensional theories of
Biot and Terzaghi. Quarterly Journal of Mechanics and
Applied Mathematics, 1963, 16, No. 4, 401–412.
21. INDRARATNA B., BALASUBRAMANIAM A. S. and RATNAYAKE P.
Performance of embankment stabilized with vertical drains
on soft clay. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE,
1994, 120, No. 2, 257–273.
22. PARRY R. H. G. and WROTH C. P. 1977. Shear properties of
soft clays. Report presented at Symposium on Soft Clay,
Bangkok, Thailand, 1977.
23. WALKER R. and INDRARATNA B. Vertical drain consolidation
with overlapping smear zones. Géotechnique, 1997, 57,
No. 5, 463–467.

What do you think?

To comment on this paper, please email up to 500 words to the editor at journals@ice.org.uk
Proceedings journals rely entirely on contributions sent in by civil engineers and related professionals, academics and students. Papers
should be 2000–5000 words long, with adequate illustrations and references. Please visit www.thomastelford.com/journals for author
guidelines and further details.

Geotechnical Engineering 161 Issue GE5 Foundation behaviour below an embankment on soft soils Rankine et al. 267

Downloaded by [ NEW YORK UNIVERSITY] on [17/09/16]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.