See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/269196420

Comparisons of One-Dimensional Consolidation Characteristics of Clays by

Using Two Different Specimen Sizes

Conference Paper  in  Geotechnical Special Publication · May 2014

DOI: 10.1061/9780784413388.034

CITATIONS READS

4 1,248

5 authors, including:

Warat Kongkitkul Raksiri Sukkarak

King Mongkut's University of Technology Thonburi King Mongkut's University of Technology Thonburi
90 PUBLICATIONS   793 CITATIONS    8 PUBLICATIONS   53 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Load-strain-time behaviours of geosynthetic-reinforced soil View project

Concrete face slab rockfill dams (CFRD) View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Warat Kongkitkul on 03 February 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Soil Behavior and Geomechanics GSP 236 © ASCE 2014 333

Comparisons of One-Dimensional Consolidation Characteristics of Clays by

Using Two Different Specimen Sizes

W. Kongkitkul1, K. Kongwisawamitr2, V. Suwanwattana3,

V. Thaweeprasart4 and R. Sukkarak5
1
Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, King Mongkut’s
University of Technology Thonburi, 126 Pracha Uthit Rd., Bang Mod, Thung Khru, Bangkok 10140,
Thailand; warat.kon@kmutt.ac.th
2,3,4
Formerly Undergraduate Student, ditto
5
Ph.D. Student, ditto

ABSTRACT: One-dimensional consolidation properties are important for prediction

of time-dependent settlement of soft clay deposits. Soft clay samples are usually
retrieved by the standard thin-wall sampler having a diameter of 3 in. (75 mm). Due
to urgency of soil exploration and lack of this standard thin-wall sampler, some
samples are collected by smaller thin-wall samplers, and therefore, cannot be
accommodated by the standard consolidation ring. This research studies on effects of
specimen size on consolidation properties of soft Bangkok clays by focusing on
comparisons of test results between the two different sizes which are: i) d60 (60 mm
in diameter and 20 mm in height that meets the ASTM D2435); and ii) d35 (35 mm
in diameter and 20 mm in height; newly developed in this study). Parameters which
have been compared are: coefficient of consolidation, cv , compression index, Cc ,
swelling index, Cs and preconsolidation stress,  pc . From the test results, the
difference in specimen’s size insignificantly affected all parameters studied.

INTRODUCTION

Natural clay samples are usually retrieved from boreholes by using the thin-wall
sampler having a diameter of 3 inches or 75 mm (Fig. 1a). This allows possibilities to
trim the retrieved clay sample to meet the ASTM D2435 standard for testing of one-
dimensional (1D) consolidation characteristics of clay in which the size of specimen
specified is 60 mm in diameter and 20 mm in height. On the other hand, due to a
rapid growth of infrastructure constructions in Thailand, in particular in the Bangkok
metropolitan area, of which the very soft to soft clay deposits are well-known (e.g.,
Balasubramaniam et al. 1978, Bergado et al. 1990), the number of sub-surface
explorations and subsequent soil property testing has been extensively increased. In
Soil Behavior and Geomechanics GSP 236 © ASCE 2014 334

a) b)

Fig. 1. Comparisons of clay samples retrieved from different thin-wall

samplers having diameters of: a) 3 in. (75 mm); and b) 2 in. (50 mm).

Fig. 2. Drawing of scaled-down consolidometer newly developed for testing

with specimens having 35-mm diameter and 20-mm height.

many cases, due to the haste of soil boring and also the lack of suitable thin-wall
sampler, soft clay samples were retrieved by the thin-wall sampler having a diameter
of 2 inches or 50 mm (Fig. 1b). As a result, it becomes impossible to perform 1D
consolidation tests using specimens with the sizes specified in the standard.
In this study, a scaled-down consolidometer was newly developed. The size of
specimens is 35 mm in diameter and 20 mm in height (Fig. 2). These dimensions
were selected due to the followings.
1) The diameter of 1D consolidation specimen specified by the ASTM D2435 is
60 mm while the one of the typical thin-wall sampler is 75 mm (Fig. 3). This
difference allows a clearance of 15 mm so that the smeared zone taken place by
sampling process is excluded when cut and placed in the consolidometer. By
using the 50-mm diameter thin-wall sampler, the specimen size of 35 mm in
diameter is therefore relevant to keep this 15-mm difference the same so as to
exclude the effects of smeared zone to the same extent (Fig. 3).
2) The height of specimen is kept at 20 mm. This is to keep the vertical drainage
length the same while avoiding the strain rate effects. That is, under otherwise
the same test conditions, the specimens having different heights are affected by
the strain rates upon the stepped vertical stress applied in the standard
consolidation test in different extents (e.g., Tatsuoka 2007, Degago et al.
2009).
Soil Behavior and Geomechanics GSP 236 © ASCE 2014 335

15 mm

Sizes of 1D 35 mm
consolidation test
60 mm specimens

75 mm 50 mm
Sizes of clay samples

Fig. 3. Schematic diagram showing the equal 15-mm radial difference

between the sizes of clay samples retrieved and the sizes of 1D consolidation
test specimens for different clay sample sizes.

a) b)

Fig. 4. Consolidometers used: a) 60 mm in diameter x 20 mm in height

(ASTM D2435); and 35 mm in diameter x 20 mm in height (newly developed;
Fig. 2).

To enhance uniform deformation of the specimen and to accurately measure the

axial strain of the specimen, the cap is not allowed to rotate in the vertical planes by
being firmly connected to the loading piston that is guided for smooth vertical
movements. This modification was adapted from a series of 1D consolidation tests
reported by Kongkitkul et al. (2011). The test specimen was submerged under water
to maintain the saturated condition while the excess pore water pressure at the
specimen bottom was not measured.
In this study, 1D consolidation tests were performed on a number of clay samples
retrieved from many locations around the Bangkok metropolitan area. Under
otherwise the same, tests were performed using two different consolidometers (Figs.
4a and 4b) to accommodate different sizes of specimens mentioned above. Then, 1D
Soil Behavior and Geomechanics GSP 236 © ASCE 2014 336

Table 1. Details of clay samples retrieved from different locations in Bangkok

metropolitan area and their basic physical and index properties

Sample No. Type Location Depth (m)  (N/m3) Gs LL (%) PL (%) PI (%)
A CH Motorway No. 7 N/A 14.6 2.57 112 49 63
B CH Bang Phli 1 N/A 14.5 2.68 116 38 78
C CH Bang Phli 2 N/A 15.2 2.69 106 30 76
D CH Chaengwattana N/A 13.5 2.68 117 39 78
E CH Wat Na Wong 7.5 - 8.0 14.8 2.58 93 28 64
F CH Terdrachan 45 7.5 - 8.0 15.9 2.62 106 25 81
G CH Suksawat 62 7.5 - 8.0 14.3 2.65 104 35 69
H CH Sukhumvit 42 12.0 - 12.5 16.1 2.82 113 22 91
I CH Ladprao 64 15.0 - 15.5 16.1 2.76 102 38 64
J CH Ladkrabang 15.0 - 15.5 15.7 2.76 116 26 90

consolidation properties consisted of coefficient of consolidation, cv , compression

index, Cc , swelling index, Cs , and preconsolidation stress,  pc were compared.

TEST PREPARATIONS

In this study, there were 10 clay-sampling locations (Table 1). These locations
cover a large extent of Bangkok metropolitan area. All the samples were retrieved by
means of 3-in (75-mm) diameter thin-wall sampler and kept undisturbed by either
wrapping with aluminium foil and plastic film or being waxed. The samples used
were retrieved from the depths of around 8 to 12 m. The physical and index
properties were also determined as shown in Table 1. In general, these basic
properties obtained from different locations are different. The liquid limit (LL) varies
from 93 to 117 % while the plasticity index (PI) from 63 to 90 %. From the LL and
PI values, all clay samples were classified as CH (Table 1).
For 1D consolidation tests, each clay sample was unwrapped and then cut into
half. One half is cut by a ring cutter to be tested by the 60-mm diameter
consolidometer (Fig. 4a) while the other half by another cutter to be tested by the 35-
mm diameter consolidometer (Fig. 4b). Subsequent test procedures were in
accordance to ASTM D2453

TEST RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Variations of void ratio and coefficient of consolidation with stress

Fig. 5 compares the relationships between void ratio ( e ) and logarithm of vertical
stress ( log  v ) obtained by tests on sample A (Motorway no. 7) using 60-mm
diameter specimen (d60) and 35-mm diameter specimen (d35). It may be seen that
these e  log  v relations are slightly different.
Soil Behavior and Geomechanics GSP 236 © ASCE 2014 337

3.0

Diameter 60 mm.
2.5
Diameter 35 mm.

2.0

Void ratio, e
1.5

1.0

0.5

0.0
1 10 100 1000 10000
Stress, (kPa)

Fig. 5. Comparison of e-log ’v relations between d60 and d35 specimens
performed on sample A.

Fig. 6a compares the relationships between coefficient of consolidation ( cv )

obtained at the degree of consolidation (U) of 50 % by the logarithm-of-time method
and logarithm of vertical stress ( log  v ) obtained by tests on sample A (Motorway
no. 7) using d60 and d35 specimens. Similarly, Fig. 6b compares the relationships
between cv obtained at U = 90 % by the square-root time method and log  v
obtained by tests on sample A (Motorway no. 7) using d60 and d35 specimens. In
general, the following trends of behaviour may be observed. The values of cv
obtained by the two different analytical methods and two different specimen sizes are
significantly similar. When the vertical stress increased, the cv values tend to
decrease due to a decrease in void ratio associated with settlement.

Comparisons of consolidation properties

In order to discuss the differences in the consolidation property parameters, the

following ratios were defined to compare the consolidation parameters obtained from
d35 specimens to those of d60 specimens, similar to the definitions defined by
Shogaki (2006).
Compression index ratio ( RCc ) is defined as the ratio of the compression index
values of d35 specimens to those of d60 specimens as shown in Eq. 1.

RCc  Cc  d 35  Cc  d 60  (1)

Swelling index ratio ( RCs ) is defined as the ratio of the swelling index values of
d35 specimens to those of d60 specimens as shown in Eq. 2.

RCs  Cs  d 35  Cs  d 60  (2)
Soil Behavior and Geomechanics GSP 236 © ASCE 2014 338

  1.4

Diameter 60 mm

Coefficient of Consol idation, CV (m2/year)

1.2 Diameter 35 mm

1.0

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0
1 10 100 1000 1000 0

a) Stress,  (kPa)

  1.4 Diameter 6 0 mm
Diameter 3 5 mm
Coefficient of Consolidation, C V (m /year)

1.2
2

1.0

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0
1 10 100 1000 10 000
b) Stress, (kPa)

Fig. 6. Comparisons of relationships between coefficient of consolidation (cv)

and vertical stress obtained using d60 and d35 specimens for sample A
(Motorway no. 7): a) logarithm-of-time method (t50); and b) square-root time
method (t90).
Preconsolidation stress ratio ( R pc ) is the ratio of the preconsolidation stresses of
d35 specimens to those of d60 specimens as shown in Eq. 3.

R pc   pc  d 35   pc  d 60  (3)

Coefficient of consolidation ratio ( RCv ) is the ratio of the coefficients of

consolidation of d35 specimens to those of d60 specimens as shown in Eq. 4.

RCv  cv  d 35  cv  d 60  (4)
Soil Behavior and Geomechanics GSP 236 © ASCE 2014 339

  2.0
Mean = 0.94 A
B
C
D
1.5 E
F

CC(d35)/CC(d60),RCC
G
H
I
1.0
J

0.5

0.0
50 60 70 80 90 100
Plasticity index , PI

Fig. 7. Variation of compression index ratio (RCc) with plasticity index (PI).

  2.0
Mean = 0.96 A
B
C
D
1.5 E
F
CS(d35)/C S(d60),RCS

G
H
I
1.0
J

0.5

0.0
50 60 70 80 90 100

Plasticity index, PI

Fig. 8. Variation of swelling index ratio (RCs) with plasticity index (PI).

Figs. 7, 8 and 9 show variations of RCc , RCs and R pc with the plasticity index
(PI), respectively. It may be seen that the range of PI values of tested clay samples
were fairly wide spanning from around 60 % to 90 % (Table 1). Despite the above-
mentioned fact, most RCc , RCs and R pc values are significantly close to unity
which implies that the difference in size of specimen used in this study may not
significantly influence the Cc , Cs and  pc values. As shown in Figs. 7, 8 and 9, the
average values of RCc , RCs and R pc for all clay samples tested are 0.94, 0.96 and
1.01, respectively. The slight decreases in Cc and Cs and the slight increase in  pc
when compared d35 to d60 specimens may be due to a larger influence of friction (if
there was) between the consolidation ring and the specimen as the ratio of this
Soil Behavior and Geomechanics GSP 236 © ASCE 2014 340

  1.4
A
Mean = 1.01 B
C
D

1.2 E
F
G

p
 ' (d35)/' (d60), R '
H
I

p
p 1.0 J

0.8

0.6
50 60 70 80 90 100
Plastic ity index, PI

Fig. 9. Variation of preconsolidation stress ratio (R’pc) with plasticity index

(PI).
  4.0
A
1:1 B
3.5
C
D
3.0 E
1 : 0.91 F
2.5 G
Initial void ratio, e 0
(d35 specimen)

H
I
2.0
J

1.5

1.0

0.5

0.0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
Initial void ratio, e 0
(d60 specimen)

Fig. 10. Comparison of initial void ratios (e0) between d60 and d35
specimens.
contact area to the specimen volume increases. That is, the initial specimen volume (
V0 ) is 0.25 d 2 h , the initial contact area with the consolidation ring ( A0 ) is  dh , and
therefore the A0 V0 ratio is 4 d . When diameter of specimen ( d ) decreases while
the height is kept the same, the A0 V0 ratio increases. When friction between the
consolidation ring and the specimen is inevitable, the d35 specimen is therefore
subjected to the effects of friction to a larger extent than the d60 specimen. However,
this friction was not measured in this study.
Fig. 10 compares the initial void ratios ( e0 ) obtained from the d35 specimens to
those of d60 specimens. A line passing through the origin was best fitted to all data
points and the slope obtained was 1:0.91. It seems that e0 of the d35 specimens were
Soil Behavior and Geomechanics GSP 236 © ASCE 2014 341

100
A
B
C

cv50 (d35)/cv50 (d60), RCv50

D
10
E

Mean = 1.40 F
G
H
1
I
J

0.1

0.01
0.01 0.1 1 10 100
'v/'pc
a)

100
A
B
C
cv90 (d35)/cv90 (d60), RCv90

D
10
E
F
Mean = 1.24
G
H
1
I
J

0.1

0.01
0.01 0.1 1 10 100
'v/'pc
b)

Fig. 11. Comparison of ratios of coefficients of consolidation between d60

and d35 specimens (RCv) plotted against ratios of vertical stress to
preconsolidation pressure (’v/’pc): a) logarithm-of-time method (RCv50);
and b) square-root time method (RCv90).

smaller than those of d60 specimens in a broad sense. This may be due to the fact
that the outer portion of specimen near to the oedometer ring is inevitably smeared
by specimen preparation. It is likely that the smeared zones in both d35 and d60
specimens seem like circular rings having the same diametrical difference between
the outer and the inner diameters. If it is true, the proportion of smeared zone to the
original volume for the d35 specimens is greater than the one of the 60 specimens.
Fig. 11a shows relationship between RCv obtained from cv determined at U = 50
% ( RCv 50 ) and the ratio of the vertical stress to the preconsolidation stress (  v  pc ).
Similarly, Fig. 11b shows relationship between RCv obtained from cv determined at
U = 90 % ( RCv 90 ) and  v  pc . The average RCv 50 and RCv 90 are 1.40 and 1.24,
 Soil Behavior and Geomechanics GSP 236 © ASCE 2014 342

respectively. Obviously, the difference of cv between d60 and d35 specimen when
obtained at U = 90 % is smaller than when obtained at U = 50 %.

CONCLUSIONS

The following conclusions may be derived from the test results of this study.
1) When the specimen diameter is decreased from 60 mm to 35 mm while the
height is kept the same at 20 mm, the obtained 1D consolidation properties in
terms of coefficient of consolidation ( cv ), compression index ( Cc ), swelling
index ( Cs ) and preconsolidation stress (  pc ) were not significantly changed.
2) Slight decreases in Cc and Cs and slight increase in  pc were found by
reduction in the specimen’s diameter. This may be due to the effects of friction
during the test process and specimen’s disturbance during the preparation of
specimen.

ACKNOWLEGDEMENT

The authors would like to thank Mr. Karin Kongkateyai, Finess Soil Testing Co.,
Ltd. and Mr. Phakarat Emapan, JLP Engineering Services Co., Ltd. for providing
many undisturbed clay samples used in this study. Financial supports from the
Thailand Research Fund (TRF), National Research Council of Thailand (NRCT) and
National Research University Project are greatly appreciated.

REFERENCES

ASTM D2435. Standard Test Methods for One-Dimensional Consolidation

Properties of Soils Using Incremental Loading.
Balasubramaniam, A.S., Hwang, Z.-M., Uddin, W., Chaudhry, A.R. and Li, Y.-G.
(1978). “Critical state parameters and peak stress envelopes for Bangkok clays.”
Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology, 11, 219-232.
Bergado, D.T., Ahmed, S., Sampaco, C.L. and Balasubramaniam, A.S. (1990).
“Settlements of Bangna-Bangpakong highway on soft Bangkok clay.” Journal of
Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE, 116(1), 136-155.
Degago, S.A., Grimstad, G., Jostad, H. P., and Nordal, S. (2009). “The non-
uniqueness of the end-of-primary (EOP) void ratio-effective stress relationship.”
Proc. of the 17th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical
Engineering, Vol.1, Alexandria, 324-327.
Kongkitkul, W., Kawabe, S., Tatsuoka, F., and Hirakawa, D. (2011): “A simple
pneumatic loading system controlling stress and strain rates for one-dimensional
compression of clay.” Soils and Foundations, 51(1), 11-30.
Shogaki, T. (2006). “Effect of specimen size on consolidation parameters of marine
clay deposits.” Journal of ASTM International, 3(7), 1-13.
Tatsuoka, F. (2007). “Inelastic deformation characteristics of geomaterial”, Special
Lecture, Soil Stress-Strain Behavior: Measurement, Modeling and Analysis, Proc.
of Geotechnical Symposium in Roma, Springer, 1-108.

View publication stats