Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Determination of Compacted Granular Layer Thickness
Determination of Compacted Granular Layer Thickness
net/publication/322555602
CITATION READS
1 120
3 authors:
Agnimitra Sengupta
Hilti Manufacturing India Pvt Ltd
9 PUBLICATIONS 4 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
All content following this page was uploaded by Agnimitra Sengupta on 30 July 2018.
ABSTRACT: In order to increase the bearing capacity of soft clay, filling of compacted sand is done by
removing the soft clay up to a specific depth. Present paper aims to find out a methodology for
determination of optimum depth of sand layer on the top of soft clay as a measure of ground improvement
technique. In this paper, strip footing carrying uniformly distributed load on compacted sand bed
followed by a soft clay layer in the form of a two layered system has been considered for analytical study.
Primarily an imaginary depth of soft clay layer at which the bearing capacity of clay as homogeneous
medium becomes equal to the vertical stress developed under strip load has been determined using
Terzaghi’s method and stress dispersion approach. The imaginary depth of homogenous soft clay thus
obtained has been transformed in to a two layered system by reverse application of Odemark’s approach
to determine the thickness of compacted sand bed. It has been found that the depth of sand bed increases
with increase in foundation load and decrease in cohesion of clay. Moreover, the depth of the sand bed
also decreases with the increase in friction angle and decrease in foundation width.
Keywords: Odemark method; strip footing; elastic modulus; compacted sand; soft clay
1. Introduction 2. Objective
Choice of shallow foundation is cost effective for Presence of weak soft clay within the influence
construction of low to medium storey building, if zone below shallow foundation affects adversely
the bearing capacity of soil below footing yields a the load carrying capacity of soil. In order to
better load bearing capacity. Therefore, the increase the bearing capacity of such soil, filling
geotechnical properties of subsoil on which the of compacted layer of granular soil is done after
foundation rests are important to determine the excavating and removing the soft clay up to a
bearing capacity. It is relevant to note that the specific depth. So, determination of optimum
bearing capacity of shallow foundation is largely depth of sand filling becomes an important factor
governed by the shear strength parameters of soil to ensure the stability of the foundation system
lying within the influence zone of footing. Such and the economy of the project. In this backdrop,
influence zone below the base level of foundation present paper aims to find out a methodology for
has been analyzed by Prandlt (1920), Terzaghi determination of optimum depth of compacted
(1943) and Meyerhof (1963, 1974, 1978) and sand bed to be placed on the top of soft clay for
Madhav and Sharma (1991). All those analysis placing shallow foundation.
reveal that the nature of failure of foundation in
3. Proposed Model
terms of shear failure was considered in respective
In this paper, load on foundation has been
research works to find out the extent of failure
assumed as uniformly distributed load acting on
zone below footing with the variations in soil
strip footing on compacted sand bed followed by a
properties with different boundary conditions. In
soft clay layer in the form of a two layered system.
this backdrop, the concept of influence zone of
Primarily an imaginary depth of soft clay layer at
footing in the subsoil needs to be examined
which the bearing capacity of clay becomes equal
judiciously to understand the depth of active soil
to the vertical stress developed under strip load
mass which takes part in the stability of the
has been determined using Terzaghi’s method and
foundation system in terms of shear as well as
stress dispersion approach. The depth of soft soil
settlement failure. Moreover, the factors which
thus obtained is the depth of homogenous clay
may affect the depth of influence zone are also
layer below which the stress due to foundation
important for evaluation of performance of
load becomes less than the bearing capacity of soil
shallow foundation during its service life.
and above which the soil will be subjected at a
Determination of Compacted Granular Layer Thickness on Soft Clay using Odemark’s Method for Design of Shallow Foundation
larger stress than the bearing capacity thereby Transformation of such two layered system can be
indicating the zone of failure. The soft clay within done with a concept of equivalent thickness (ℎ𝑒 )
the zone of failure needs to be replaced by suitable with a homogeneous modulus (𝐸2 ) and with a
thickness of compacted sand bed with a better load Poisson ratio of 𝜈2 , which can be expressed as
carrying capacity. Odemark’s method (P.Ullidtz,
1998) is generally used to transform a two layered
3 𝐸1 1 − 𝜈2 2
system into a homogenous system considering the ℎ𝑒 = ℎ1 √ ( ) (2)
elastic moduli of the layers and thickness of top 𝐸2 1 − 𝜈1 2
layer. In the present analysis, the depth of
homogenous soft clay layer has been transformed If the Poisson’s ratio of soil of two layers are
in to a two layered system by reverse application assumed same then the equation may be expressed
of Odemark’s approach. The mathematical model as
used in present work has been illustrated below 3 𝐸2
with relevant assumptions made in the model. ℎ1 = ℎ𝑒 √ (3)
If B is the width of the footing and ℎ is the 𝐸1
imaginary depth at which the bearing capacity of In the present problem, the thickness of the
purely cohesive soft soil with cohesion 𝑐 becomes homogeneous clay (ℎ𝑒 ) may be obtained by
equal to the vertical stress due to surface load analytical approach using equation (1) Hence, the
intensity (q) on a strip footing resting at ground thickness of top layer in a two layered system ℎ1
surface, the following expression may be obtained may be determined from the equation (3) if the
using 2: 1 method of stress dispersion. elastic moduli of compacted sand and soft clay
𝐵 layers are known.
𝑐𝑁𝑐 = 𝑞 In the present paper, the ratio of elastic moduli of
𝐵+ℎ compacted sand bed and soft clay has been
𝐵
ℎ= (𝑞 − 𝑐𝑁𝑐 ) (1) considered as the respective ratio of ultimate
𝑐𝑁𝑐 bearing capacity (IS: 6403-1981) of soil with strip
Now, the depth thus obtained has to be footing which means
transformed into a two layer system using reverse 𝐸1 0.5𝛾𝐵𝑁𝛾
Odemark’s approach. =
𝐸2 𝑐𝑁𝑐
Odemark’s Method for system transformation
Odemark’s method assumes that the stress and where 𝑁𝑐 and 𝑁𝛾 are the bearing capacity factors,
strain below a layer depend on the stiffness of that and 𝛾= unit weight of soil
layer only. If the thickness, moduli and Poisson Therefore
ratio of the layers are changed but the stiffness
3 𝑐𝑁𝑐
remains unchanged, the stress and strains below ℎ1 = ℎ𝑒 √ (4)
the layer should also remain unchanged. The 0.5𝛾𝐵𝑁𝛾
transformation of layers can be done in the
following manner as shown in Fig. 1 by 4. Validation
Odemark’s approach. If the depth of compacted sand layer (ℎ1 ) is
relatively small compared with the foundation
width B, a punching shear failure may occur in the
top layer followed by a general shear failure in
bottom layer as shown in Fig. 2.
However, the ultimate bearing capacity of shallow
Fig. 1 Transformation of a layered system by foundation with length L, and width B placed on a
stronger sand layer underlain by a weak clay that
Odemark’s Approach
extends to great depth as shown in Fig. 2 was
The two layer system with modulus 𝐸1 of proposed by Meyerhof and Hanna (1978) and
thickness ℎ1 has compacted sand layer in the may be expressed as
present model with Poisson ratio 𝜈1 as top layer
resting on bottom layer with modulus of 𝐸2
consists of soft clay and Poisson ration of 𝜈2 .
2
Indian Geotechnical Conference 2017 - GeoNEst
14-16 December 2017, IIT Guwahati, India
c=15 kN/m2
top (𝑞1 ) and bottom layer (𝑞2 ). 5 c=20 kN/m2
𝑞1 𝑐𝑁𝑐 c=25 kN/m2
= (7) 4
𝑞2 0.5𝛾𝐵𝑁𝛾
where 𝑁𝛾 = Meyerhof ‘s Bearing capacity factor 3
𝑁𝑐 = 5.14, γ = Unit weight of compacted sand.
2
The comparative analysis has been presented in
Table-1 which reveals a reasonable good
1
agreement with the results obtained using the
analytical approach of Meyerhof and Hanna. The 0
input data considered for such comparison was
c = 20 kN/m2, ϕ = 40° and γ = 19 kN/m3. 0 20 40 60
Angle of Internal friction (°)
Table-1 Comparison with Meyerhof’s study Fig. 3 Variation of sand layer thickness with angle
of internal friction
Footing Compacted sand layer
thickness (m) (Foundation Load Intensity = 80kN/m2 and
Load Intensity Foundation width = 2m)
(kN/m2) Meyerhof Present study
150 1.40 1.44
200 2.01 2.10
250 2.43 2.76
3
Determination of Compacted Granular Layer Thickness on Soft Clay using Odemark’s Method for Design of Shallow Foundation
B=2.0m
B=2.5m References
3
Prandlt (1920) Lecture at the International Centre
for Theoretical Physics, Trieste, Italy.
2 Terzaghi, K.(1943) Bearing Capacity Theory
Theoretical soil mechanics, John Wiley &Sons,
1 New York.
Meyerhof, G. G. (1963) Some recent research on
the bearing capacity of foundations, Canadian
0 Geotechnical Journal 1: 16-26.
0 20 40 60
Angle of Internal Friction (°) Meyerhof, G.G. (1974) Ultimate Bearing Capacity
of Footings on Sand Layer Overlying Clay,
Fig. 4 Variation of sand thickness with angle of Canadian Geotechnical Journal, vol. 11, pp. 223-
internal friction 229.
(Foundation load intensity = 80 kN/m2 and
cohesion c =20kN/m2) Meyerhof, G.G, and Hanna, A.M. (1978) Ultimate
Bearing capacity of Foundations on Layered Soil
5
under Inclined Load, Canadian Geotechnical
Compacted sand thickness (m)