Notes 3 - Soil Compressibility For Shallow Foundations

Soil Compressibility for Geotechnical
Design of Shallow Foundations
Geotechnical Engineering for Foundations − A/Prof Mohamed Shahin Curtin University − Page 1
Introduction
 As mentioned previously, there are two main criteria that need to be considered
for a safe design of foundations, including:
(a) The foundation must be stable against the bearing capacity (shear) failure of
the surrounding soil; and
(b) The foundation must not settle beyond tolerable values of total and
differential settlements so that the structural damage can be avoided and
serviceability can be achieved.
 Settlement of foundations can be divided into the following three parts:
– Immediate (elastic) settlement (Si);
– Consolidation settlement (Sc); and
– Secondary compression settlement (Ss).
 The total settlement of a foundation, St, is the sum of the above three settlement
components, that is:
St = Si + Sc + Ss (1)
 Immediate Settlement (Si): (also called elastic settlement) occurs instantaneously
after the load application during, or immediately after, the erection of a
structure. It is primarily a consequence of soil movements as a result of grain
distortion and reorientation. For dry and partially saturated soils, it is mainly
due to expulsion of air and for fully saturated granular soils, it is due to the
instantaneous expulsion of water. In cohesive soils where drainage is poor,
immediate settlement takes place under undrained conditions where there is
change in shape without volume change. Elastic settlement is the major concern
for granular soils (sands and gravels) than cohesive soils due to the more porous
and free-draining nature of granular soils, causing the settlement to occur almost
instantaneous regardless of whether the soil is above or below the water table.
 Consolidation Settlement (Sc): (sometimes called primary settlement) occurs in

saturated soils when the application of loads creates a state of excess pore water
pressure that can only be dissipated by the gradual expulsion of water out of the
soil particles which results in volume changes. This settlement generally takes
several years to occur and is the major concern for cohesive soils (silts & clays).
 Secondary Compression Settlement (Ss): (also called creep settlement) occurs
due to decomposition of soil particles with no change in applied stresses. In
reality, consolidation and creep settlements may occur simultaneously.
However, for simplicity, it can be assumed that creep begins upon completion
of the primary consolidation settlement (i.e. after the full dissipation of excess
pore water pressure). This settlement is usually negligible for most soils
especially sands and gravels, but it may be significant for organic soils and
highly plastic clays.
Calculations of Immediate Settlement
 Many methods are available in the literature for computing the immediate
(elastic) settlement. In this unit, only those which are of practical interest
will be considered, as follows:
– Janbu et al. (1956) method based on the theory of elasticity; and

– Schmertmann (1978) method using the cone penetration test (CPT).
 It should be noted that footings founded on cohesionless soils (i.e. sand and
gravel) reach almost its total settlement during the construction stage and thus
its total settlement is equivalent to the immediate settlement, i.e. St = Si. This is
due to the high permeability of cohesionless soils in which the water inside the
soil voids is expelled simultaneously with the application of load and as such
the immediate and consolidation settlements are rolled into one, and the
secondary settlement is usually negligible. Schmertmann (1978) method is
usually used for cohesionless soils.
Immediate Settlement by Janbu’s Method
 The immediate settlement can be determined using Janbu et al. (1956) method,
which based on the theory of elasticity, assuming the soil to behave as an elastic
material, as follows (see Figure 1):
Bqnet
Si ( centre)  (1  s2 ) I1 I 2 (2.1) (centre of flexible footing)
Es
Si ( rigid )  0.92 Si ( centre ) (2.2) (rigid footing)
Si = elastic settlement;
B = width of foundation;
qnet = net uniform applied pressure on the foundation;
Es = Young’s modulus of soil considered for a stratum of depth, H, or 5B
below the foundation, whichever is smaller.
νs = Poisson’s ratio of the soil underneath the footing; and
I1 & I2 = influence factors for the depth of foundation and footing shape,
respectively, obtained from Figure 2 (B = footing length & L = footing length).
Df
qnet
Df/B
B×L
H or 5B Rigid Flexible
foundation foundation
settlement Soil settlement
Bedrock
Fig. 1: Elastic settlement of flexible and rigid foundations
H/B
Fig. 2: Influence factors I1 and I2 for Janbu et al. method
(after Christian and Carrier, 1978)
 For a multi-layered soil stratum, use the weighted average of Es and νs for the soil
layers located within H or 5B, whichever is smaller.
Flexible vs Rigid Footings:

 Flexible footings are those having low thickness-to-breath ratio (e.g. pad
footings), whereas rigid footings are those having high thickness-to-breadth
ratio (e.g. rafts). The rigidity of raft foundations can be determined using the
rigidity or stiffness factor, K, as follows:
4 Er (1  s2 )t 3
K (3) (for flexible rafts, K → 0, and for rigid rafts, K → ∞)
3Es (1  r2 )b3
where:
Er = modulus of elasticity of the raft;
Es = modulus of elasticity of the soil;
νr = Poisson’s ratio of the raft;
νs = Poisson’s ratio of the soil;
t = thickness of the raft; and
b = breadth (width) of the raft.
 Table 1 gives approximate ranges of the elastic parameters (i.e. Es and νs) for
various soils, and can be used for preliminary design purposes.
Table 1: Elastic parameters of various soils (Das, 1998)
Type of soil Modulus of elasticity, Es Poisson’s

(MN/m2) ratio, νs
Loose sand 10-25 0.20-0.04
Medium dense sand 15-30 0.25-0.04
Dense sand 35-55 0.30-0.45
Silty sand 10-20 0.20-0.40
Sand and gravel 70-170 0.15-0.35
Soft clay 4-20 ‒
Medium clay 20-40 0.20-0.50
Stiff clay 40-100 ‒
Settlement by Schmertmann’s Method
 This method uses the cone penetration test (CPT) results and is mainly for
granular (cohesionless) soils. As previously mentioned, cohesionless soils
have high permeability in which the water in the voids is expelled
simultaneously with the application of load during construction and as such the
immediate (elastic) and consolidation settlements are rolled into one.
 The CPT test consists of a cone of standard dimensions (Fig. 3) which is fitted
with two load cells and associated pressure gauges, one measures the cone tip
resistance, qc, and the other measures the sleeve friction, fs (Figs. 4a & b).
 The cone tip resistance, qc, is very useful in the sense that it can be correlated
to some important soil properties such as undrained shear strength, su, internal
friction angle, , relative density, RD, and Young’s modulus of elasticity of
soil, Es. The ratio of fs to qc, known as friction ratio FR (%) = fs/qc ×100, can
also be used to give a continuous soil profile (see Fig. 5) from which soil can
be classified using the graph in Fig. 5.
Cone Tip Resistance, qc (MPa) Sleeve Friction, f s (kPa) Friction Ratio, FR ( % )
0 2 4 6 8 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
0 0 0
50 50 50
100 100 100
150 150 150
200 200 200
250 250 250
300 300 300
350 350 350
Depth (mm)
Depth (mm)
Depth (mm)
400 400 400
27.8 mm 450 450 450
500 500 500
550 550 550
600 600 600

Measures fs 650 650 650
700 700 700
750 750 750
800
(a) 800
(b)
800
(c)
850 850 850
900 900 900
Fig. 4: Typical results from the CPT apparatus
Measures qc
Point angle = 60o

Diameter = 35.7 mm
Fig. 3: Typical cone penetrometer
Fig. 5: Soil classification based on CPT results

 The calculation of settlement by Schmertman’s method involves the use of a
vertical strain influence factor, Iz, whose value varies with depth (Fig.6). The
procedure consists of dividing the soil below the footing into n layers, of
thicknesses Δz1, Δz2, Δz3, …, Δzn. If soil conditions permit, it is simpler if the
layers can be made of equal thickness, Δz. The total settlement can then be
calculated as follows:
n
Iz
St  C1C2 qnet  z (4)
1 Es
where,
St = total settlement;
qnet = net uniform applied pressure;
C1 = depth correction factor;
C2 = creep factor;
Iz = vertical strain influence factor;
Δz = thickness of elemental layer; and Fig. 6: Vertical strain influence factor
Es = soil modulus of elasticity; (Schmertmann et al., 1978)
 The equations for calculating C1 and C2 are as follows:
 qo   t 
C1  1  0.5  (5) and C2  1  0.2 log   (6)
 qnet   0.1 
where,
q’o = effective vertical overburden pressure at the foundation level; and
t = time in years after the application of foundation loading for which
the settlement is required. It is suggested that C2 = 1, disregarding the
time-dependent settlement unless the soil contains clay or organic matter.
 Figure 6 gives the distribution of the vertical strain influence factor, Iz, for
square or circular footings (L/B = 1) and strip footings (L/B ≥ 10). For
rectangular footings (10 > L/B > 1), settlement can be calculated separately for
L/B = 1 and L/B = 10, and interpolated on the basis of L/B.
 It can be seen from Fig. 6 that, for square footings, Iz is equal to 0.1 at the
footing base and zero at depth 2B below the footing base. On the other hand, for
strip footings, Iz is equal to 0.2 at the footing base and zero at depth 4B below the
footing base. The depths at which the maximum Iz is occurred can be calculated
as follows:
qnet
I z  0.5  0.1 (7)
po
where,
p’o = effective vertical overburden pressure at depths (below the foundation
level) of B/2 for square footings and B for strip footings.
 The modulus of elasticity, Es, to be used in Schmertmann’s method depends

on the type of foundation as follows:
Es = 2.5qc (for square footings); and
Es = 3.5qc (for a strip footings).
Worked Example (1)
A square footing of size 8 × 8 m is founded at a depth of 2 m below the ground
surface in loose to medium sand with gross applied pressure equal to 152 kN/m2.
CPT conducted at the site gave the following average qc values:
Layer No Depth below ground surface (m) Average qc (MPa)

1 2-11 3.6
2 11-18 6.8
The water table is at 2 m below the ground surface and the unit weight of soil
above the water table γ = 16.5 kN/m3, and below the water table γ sat = 18.3 kN/m3.
Estimate the settlement of foundation using Schmertmann’s method at the end of a
construction period of 3 years. [Answer: St= 69.2 mm]
Strain Influence Factor for Worked Example (1)
Consolidation Settlement
 When a saturated soil mass is subjected to loads, no volume change will
initially occur and an excess pore water pressure will develop. By the gradual
dissipation of the excess pore water pressure with time as a result of water
being squeezed out of soil voids, the soil tends to decrease in volume and after
a long period of time, all the excess pore water pressure will dissipate and
settlement of the soil will reach its long term (final) value. This process is
known as consolidation.
 The term consolidation is reserved for the behaviour of a saturated, fine-

grained soils undergoing a reduction in volume as the result of some increase
in load. The consolidation characteristics of a soil are important for the
geotechnical engineer to be able to calculate the consolidation settlement of
soils as a result of some load increase.
 The simplest consolidation is one-dimensional consolidation in which lateral

strain is assumed to be zero. This is similar to an element of soil which is
located at a certain depth within a soil mass where a vertical load applied to
the ground surface will cause the soil element to undergo vertical compression
and will not be able to expand laterally because of the confining influence of
the surrounding soil.
 The behaviour of a saturated, fine-grained soil undergoing consolidation can be
readily explained by the use of the piston and spring model, as shown in Fig. 7.
 A piston, P, is loaded vertically and compresses a spring inside the chamber,
which is filled with water (Fig. 7a). The spring simulates the soil skeleton (i.e.
the soil particles), while the water in the cylinder represents the water in the soil
voids. The valve, V, at the top of the piston represents the pore sizes in the soil
(i.e. the permeability), and at equilibrium (at rest) the valve is open and no
water flows out. This situation is analogous to one where a soil layer is at
equilibrium with the weight of all soil layers (i.e. overburden) above it. A
pressure gauge is connected to the cylinder and shows the hydrostatic pressure,
uo, at this particular location within the soil.
o (overburden pressure) o  
o  
(a) At equilibrium (b) Under load, o   (c) At equilibrium under o  
Note increased pore water Note settlement, S
pressure and water flow
Fig. 7: The piston and spring model to explain soil consolidation (adapted from Holtz and Kovacs, 1981)
 Now let us imposes an additional vertical load increment, Δ, to the piston
(Fig. 7b). This is analogous to the additional stress caused due to erecting a
structure on the site, or placing fill over the site. At the start of the
consolidation process, let us assume that the valve, V, is initially closed. Upon
application of the load, the pressure is immediately transferred to the water
inside the cylinder. This is due to the fact that water is incompressible, and as
a result of the valve being closed, no water can escape and none of the load
increment Δ is felt by the spring (soil skeleton). Notice that because of this,
the pressure measured by the gauge has increased to uo + Δu, where Δu = Δ.
This increase in the porewater pressure, Δu, is known as excess porewater
pressure.
 Now let us open the valve, V, to simulate the low permeability of a fine-
grained soil. With time, water will flow out of the cylinder through the valve,
and the load increment, Δ, will be slowly transferred from the water in the
cylinder to the spring. This results in a compression of the spring, S, as shown
in Fig. 7c. Once the spring and water have balanced the combined load of
’o+Δ (i.e. at equilibrium), no further water will flow out of the valve, the
spring takes the entire combined load and the porewater pressure will return to
its original value of uo. The process by which water flows out through the soil
as a result of an increased load, and the consequent reduction in the porewater
pressure, is known as porewater pressure dissipation.
One Dimensional Consolidation (Oedometer) Test
 To predict the consolidation settlement in a soil, the stress-strain properties of the
soil need to be obtained. This usually involves bringing a soil sample to the
laboratory for a one-dimensional consolidation test (also known as oedometer
test), and is conducted in a consolidometer (or oedometer). The experimental
apparatus for this test is shown in Fig. 8, and details of the test procedure are
given in the laboratory manual of the course.
 The test starts by placing undisturbed soil sample (usually 75 mm diameter and
20 mm thick), in a brass or stainless steel ring. The purpose of this ring is to
maintain zero horizontal strain, thus, producing one-dimensional consolidation.
Porous stones are placed at each end of the specimen so that the water is allowed
to pass through freely. The sample, ring and porous stones are then submerged
inside the oedometer cell, which is filled with water to keep the soil saturated
and to simulate the worst case scenario in the field. A load P is applied to the
soil specimen and maintained (usually for a period of 24 hours) so that the soil is
allowed to consolidate over time (i.e. the excess porewater pressure has
dissipated), thus, the applied stress is an effective stress. As the test progresses,
the axial compression is measured by means of a dial gauge placed above the
sample until the soil has achieved full consolidation.
 Over a period of a few days, a series of load increments are applied to the
specimen and settlement at various increments is recorded.
 Once the maximum required applied load has been reached, the loads are
removed in stages at 24 hour intervals and the increase in thickness of the
specimen, or rebound, is recorded.
Dial gauge
Fig. 8: The oedometer test
Table top consolidometer (ELE International)
 The results are then presented by plotting either (see Figure 9):
(a) The void ratio, e, versus the effective consolidation pressure ’c = P/A,
A is the cross sectional area of soil specimen; or
(b) The void ratio, e, versus the logarithm of the effective consolidation
pressure log ’c.
e e
’c Log (’c)

Fig. 9: Consolidation curves: (a) e versus σ’c; and (b) e versus logσ’c
 The void ratio, e, at the end of any applied load can be calculated in terms of the
height of soil specimen at the end of load increment, H, and the equivalent height
of soil particles (solids), Hs, as follows:
H  Hs
e (8)
Hs
The height of soil particles, Hs, can be calculated (in mm) as follows:
ms
Hs  1000 (9)
Gs A
where:
ms = mass of dry soil (in gm); Gs = soil specific gravity; A = cross sectional area
of the oedometer (in mm2).
 The curves shown in Figure 9 are known as the consolidation curves, from
which some important soil properties can be derived and used for the
calculation of consolidation settlement, as will be explained next.
Determination of Consolidation Settlement from e-σ’c Curve
 In this method, the consolidation settlement is obtained from a soil property
called the coefficient of volume compressibility, mv, which can be measured form
the e-σ’c curve, as will be explained later. The coefficient of volume
compressibility is a measure of the compressibility of the clay and is defined as
the volumetric strain, εv, per unit stress increase, and is expressed as follows:
 v V / Vo
mv   (10)
 
where; Vo = initial volume of soil, ∆V = volume change and ∆σ = stress
increase that causes the volume change ∆V. mv takes unit inverse of pressure
(e.g. m2/kN). For a clay layer of initial thickness Ho (see Figure 10) and
considering one-dimensional consolidation where the horizontal cross-
sectional area remains the same, ∆V/Vo = ∆H/Ho. Therefore, Eqn. (10) can be
rewritten as follows:
Sc  H  mv H o  (11)
where;
Sc = consolidation settlement;
mv = coefficient of volume compressibility obtained from the oedometer test;
Ho = thickness of compressible soil layer; and
∆σ = additional vertical stress (at the middle of the compressible clay layer) due
to external load q.
WT q
GL
∆H
e1
Δe
 Soil sample
Ho e2
to the lab
Δσ’c
 ’c
σ’c1 σ’c2
Field
Laboratory oedometer test
Fig. 10: Determination of consolidation settlement using mv and e-logσ’c method
 From Figure (10), the coefficient of volume compressibility, mv, can be obtained
by choosing any two points close to each other on the curve e-σ’c so that the line
connecting is almost a straight-line from which mv is calculated as follows:
e /  'c
mv  (12)
1  e1
 As can be seen in Figure 10, mv for a particular soil varies depending on the stress
range over which it is calculated. The British Standards recommends the use of mv
calculated for a stress increment of 100 kPa in excess of the effective overburden
pressure of the in-situ soil at the depth of interest.
Worked Example (2)
 A building is supported on the flexible raft foundation shown in the figure below,
which has the dimensions: 30 m × 45 m, with a net applied pressure of 125 kPa.
Determine the consolidation settlement of the raft due to the clay layer, using: (i)
stress distribution of 2 vertical: 1 horizontal; and (ii) Newmark’s chart.
[Answers: Sc = 64.4 mm; or Sc(centre) = 106.8 mm and Sc(corner) = 38.5 mm]
mv = 0.35 m2/MN
Determination of Consolidation Settlement from e-logσ’c Curve
 The determination of consolidation settlement from the e-logσ’c curve requires
the following soil properties to be obtained.
– The Recompression Index, Cr: is the gradient of the recompression portion of
the consolidation curve, and is given algebraically as follows (see Fig. 11):
e1  e2
Cr (15)
(log c ) 2  (log c )1
– The Compression Index, Cc: is the gradient of the virgin compression portion
of the consolidation curve, and is given algebraically as follows (see Fig. 11):
e3  e4
C c (16)
(log c ) 4  (log c )3
– The Swelling Index, Cs: is the gradient of the rebound portion of the
consolidation curve, and is given algebraically as follows (see Fig. 11):
e5  e6
C s (17)
(log c ) 6  (log c )5
In theory, the recompression and rebound curves have nearly equal slopes and
as such, Cs may be used for settlement calculations instead of Cr.
(e1, ’c1)
1 Cr (e , ’ )
2 c2
2
e
3 (e3, ’c3)
Cc
5
(e5, ’c5)
Cs
6 4 (e4, ’c4)
(e6, ’c6)
Log (’c)
Fig. 11: Determination of consolidation indices
 The determination of consolidation settlement is dependent on the soil stress
history (i.e. preconsolidation pressure, ’p) and the current overburden
pressure (i.e. ’vo) or whether the soil is normally consolidated or
overconsolidated. Preconsolidation pressure is the maximum effective vertical
stress the soil had in its entire life, and the overburden pressure is the effective
vertical stress due to the soil ownweight.
 If a soil has never been loaded above its current overburden pressure, i.e. ’p
= ’vo, the soil is said to be normally consolidated. If, on the other hand, the
soil has been previously loaded with an effective vertical stress that is greater
than the current overburden pressure (i.e. ’p > ’vo), the soil is said to be
overconsolidated. A situation such as this, can occur as a result of erosion or
the removal of a structure from a site.
 The overconsolidation ratio, OCR, is defined as the ratio of ’p to ’vo, as
follows:
 p
OCR  (18)
 vo
If OCR = 1, the soil is normally consolidated; and
if OCR > 1, the soil is overconsolidated.
A soil can never have an OCR < 1, as such a soil is one that has been recently
deposited and equilibrium stresses have yet to be attained.
Determination of Preconsolidation Pressure
 Casagrande (1936) proposed a graphical method whereby the preconsolidation pressure
can be determined from the oedometer test results as follows (Fig. 12):
1. Choose by eye the point of minimum radius on the consolidation curve (i.e. Point A).
2. Draw a horizontal line from Point A.
3. Draw a tangent to the curve at Point A.
4. Bisect the angle made by Steps 2 and 3.
5. Extend the straight line portion of the virgin compression curve up to where it meets
the bisector line obtained in Step 4. The point of intersection of these two lines (Point
B) is the preconsolidation pressure, ’p .
 Due to sample disturbance, field consolidation curve could be different from that
obtained from laboratory. Schmertmann procedure can be used to reconstruct the field
consolidation curve. This procedure is performed as follows (Fig. 13):
1. Determine ’p using the Casagrande procedure, as previous, and mark it on the x-axis.
2. Compute the overburden pressure, ’vo, at the sample depth and mark it on the x-axis.
3. Determine the initial void ratio eo, and mark eo and 0.42 eo on the y-axis.
4. Draw a horizontal line through eo and a vertical line through ’vo to meet at Point C.
5. From point C, draw a line parallel to the rebound curve and continue to the right until it
meets the vertical line through ’p so that Point D is formed. Note that this step is
unnecessary if ’p = ’vo (see Fig. 14).
6. Extend the virgin line down to meet a horizontal line through 0.42 eo to locate Point E.
7. Draw a line connecting Points D and E, which will be the reconstructed (field) virgin
line, the slope of which gives the true Cc that needs to be used for design.
 ’p
B
e
A ×
×
Virgin compression curve
 ’p
Log (’c)
Fig. 12: Casagrande’s method of determining the preconsolidation pressure
e
C
eo
Reconstructed
virgin curve
0.42 eo
E
’vo  ’p Log (’c)
Fig. 13: Schmertmann’s procedure for reconstructing field of consolidation curve for overconsolidated soils
e
C
eo
Reconstructed
virgin curve
0.42 eo
E
 ’p Log (’c)
’vo
Fig. 14: Schmertmann’s procedure for reconstructing field consolidation curve for normally consolidated soils
 Consolidation Settlement of Normally Consolidated Soils (’vo = ’p ):
The initial and final stress conditions of a normally consolidated soil are as
shown in Fig. 15 from which it can be obtained that:
e
Cc  (19)
log(  ' f )  log(  ' vo )
For a soil layer of initial thickness Ho that will be compressed by ∆H, the
following relationship applies:
H
e  1  eo (20)
Ho
By substituting Δe in Eqn. (19) with the value in Eqn. (20), the consolidation
settlement, Sc, can be calculated as follows:
Cc  σ 
Sc  H o log  f  (21)
1  eo  σvo 
where;
Sc = consolidation settlement;
Cc = compression index;
eo = initial void ratio of the compressible soil layer;
Ho = initial height of the compressible soil layer;
σ’vo = overburden pressure at the middle of the compressible soil layer; and
σ’f = final applied stress at the middle of compressible soil layer = σ’vo + ∆σ
in which ∆σ is the additional stress at the middle of compressible soil
layer due to the external load.
e
Initial stress condition
Δe Cc
Final stress condition
Virgin compression curve
Δ
Log (’c)
’vo=’p  ’f
Fig. 15: Consolidation of normally consolidated soils
 Consolidation Settlement of Overconsolidated Soils – Case I (’o < ’f ≤ ’p ):
If the initial and final stresses (’vo and ’f ) do not exceed the preconsolidation
pressure (’p ), the entire consolidation process occurs on the recompression
curve, as shown in Fig. 16. In this case, the analysis is identical to that of the
normally consolidated soils except that the recompression index, Cr, should be
used instead of the compression index, Cc, as follows:
Cr  σf 
Sc  H o log   (22)
1  eo  σvo 
 Consolidation Settlement of Overconsolidated Soils – Case II (’vo < ’p < ’f):
If the consolidation process begins at the recompression curve and ends on the
virgin curve, as shown in Fig. 17, then the analysis must consider both Cr and
Cc, as follows:
Cr  σp  C c  σf 
Sc  H o log    H o log   (23)
 σ 
1  eo  σvo  1  e o  p
Initial stress condition Initial stress condition
e Recompression e Recompression
curve curve
Cr Final stress Cr
Δe condition
Virgin
curve
Δe
Δ
Cc
Final stress
condition
Δ
’vo  ’f  ’p Log (’c) ’vo  ’p  ’f Log (’c)
Fig. 16: Consolidation of overconsolidated soils Fig. 17: Consolidation of overconsolidated soils
(σ’vo < σ’f ≤ σ’p) (σ’vo < σ’p≤ σ’f)
Worked Example (3)
 Tests on undisturbed soil samples taken from 7 m thick saturated clay layer showed that
it had a void ratio of 0.92. The in-situ overburden pressure in the middle of the clay layer
was found to be 50kPa. An oedometer test conducted on a sample taken from the middle
of the clay layer gave the results in the following table:
Consolidation stress, Void ratio, Comments
σ’c (kPa) e
20 0.953 Loading
40 0.948
80 0.938
160 0.920
320 0.878
640 0.789
1280 0.691
320 0.719 Unloading
80 0.754
20 0.791
a) Plot the consolidation curve (i.e. e versus log ’c), and estimate the preconsolidation
pressure, ’p, recompression index, Cr, and compression index, Cc.
b) Investigate whether the clay is normally consolidated or overconsolidated.
c) A multi-storey building is expected to increase the vertical effective stress in the middle
of the clay layer by 450 kPa. Estimate the amount of settlement that will occur as a
result of consolidation of the clay layer.
[Answer: (a) 280 kPa, 0.025 & 0.326; (b) 5.6 and (c) 367 mm]
Consolidation Curve for Worked Example (3)
1 σ'v0 = 50 kPa
σ'p= 280 kPa
σ'f = 500 kPa
0.9
Void ratio
0.8
0.7
Δ∆σ
= =450
350kPa
kPa
0.6
10 100 1000 10000
Consolidation stress (kPa)
Rate of Consolidation Settlement
 As mentioned previously, consolidation is the gradual dissipation of the excess
porewater pressure, Δu, from a clay layer, as a result of a load application, Δ,
which induces the primary consolidation settlement. Many years, or even
decades, may be required for the full dissipation of porewater pressure to occur,
so geotechnical engineers often need to evaluate the rate of consolidation
settlement, in addition to the maximum consolidation settlement. This section
investigates the ability to produce relationships between the consolidation
settlement and time (i.e. degree or rate of consolidation).
 In order to estimate the degree of consolidation of a clay layer after a load
application, Δ, the rate of excess porewater pressure dissipation needs to be
determined. For one-dimensional consolidation, Terzaghi derived the following
differential equation to estimate the rate of dissipation of Δu at some time t and
depth z:
 (u )  2 (u )
 Cv (24)
t z 2
Cv is defined as the coefficient of consolidation (usually takes the unit of
m2/year) and can be calculated as:
k
Cv  (25)
mv  w
where;
k = soil permeability;
mv = coefficient of volume compressibility; and
γw = unit weight of water.
 The solution for Terzaghi’s differential equation of soil consolidation (i.e. Eqn.
24) can be carried out using Fourier series and ascertaining the following
boundary conditions for a clay layer of thickness H that has double drainage:
- At t = 0, the initial excess porewater pressure Δuo = Δ
- At t = ∞, the final excess porewater pressure Δuf = 0
- At z = 0, Δu = 0
(for any time between 0 and infinity)
- At z = H, Δu = 0
  (2 N  1) z   4 Tv  
 ( 2 N 1) 2  2 

 4
u(t , z )   z   sin  e  (26)
N 0  ( 2 N  1)  2 Hd 
 
and
Cv t
Tv  2 (27)
Hd
where:
Δu (t, z) = excess porewater pressure at time t and depth z;
Δz = change in total vertical stress at depth z due to external load;
Hd = length of longest drainage path. For single drainage, Hd is equal to
the thickness of the compressible stratum and for double drainage, Hd
is equal to one half the thickness of the compressible stratum (see Fig. 18);
Cv = coefficient of consolidation; and
Tv = a parameter called time factor obtained using Eqn. (27).
 The solution of Eqn. (26) requires a summation of a number of increments N, each
increment of N produces a progressively smaller change in the summation, thus,
the summation needs to continue until this incremental change becomes
negligible. This occurs at an N < 10, although sometimes it may take more.
H Hd H
Hd
Single drainage Double drainage
Fig. 18: Computation of the length of the longest drainage path, Hd

 By definition, the average degree of consolidation, U, at any time t for a clay
layer is the ratio of the consolidation settlement at that time, Sc(t),to the
maximum consolidation settlement, Sc(max), or mathematically:
Sc (t )
U (28)
Sc (max)
 In order to obtain U in terms of the excess porewater pressure, Δu, it is essential

to assume that the vertical strain (or settlement) due to consolidation is directly
proportional to the vertical stress. This assumption means that the vertical
settlement becomes directly proportional to the drop in excess porewater
pressure (i.e. Sc ∝-Δu), thus, the following equation can be assumed to be valid:
uo  ut
U (29)
uo
where:
Δut is the excess porewater pressure at time t; and
Δuo is the initial excess porewater pressure.
 The values of Δut and Δuo in Eqn. (29) can be calculated using Eqn. (26),
leading to a unique relationship between U and Tv, as shown in Figure 19. This
relationship may also be represented by the following equations:
4Tv
U 100 % when U ≤ 60% (30)

and
 
 0.085Tv 

U  1  10  0.933 
 100% when U > 60% (31)
 
Fig. 19: U versus Tv for one-dimensional consolidation
Determination of Cv from the Oedometer Test
 As mentioned previously, Fig. 19 shows that there is a unique relationship between the
average degree of consolidation U and time factor Tv. Consequently, if Tv at any time t is
known, U at that time can be determined. From Eqn. (27), it can be seen that Tv is a
function of the coefficient of consolidation Cv. For a given load increment on a soil
specimen, Cv is rarely obtained from Eqn. (25), rather, it is computed by rearranging Eqn.
(27) and using one of the following two commonly used graphical methods:
1. The square-root of time method; and
2. The logarithm of time method.
 Square Root of Time Method
For a given incremental loading of the laboratory test, the specimen deformation against
the square root of time (in minutes) is plotted, as shown in Figure 20. The method is as
follows:
1. Draw a straight line AB through the early portion of the curve, which intersects the zero
time axis at Point A, and cuts the square root of time axis at Point B.
2. Draw line AC such that OC = 1.15 OB.
3. Where line AC intersects the consolidation-time curve at Point D, this gives the square root
of time for 90% consolidation (√t90).
4. For 90% consolidation, T90 = 0.848 (see Fig. 18), so:
2
Cvt90 0.848 H
T90  0.848  2
or Cv  d
(32)
Hd t90
Hd is the drainage path of the soil specimen used in the laboratory and is equal to one half
the average thickness of soil specimen during a given load increment.
A
Axial deformation (increase)
t90
O C
B
t (minute)
x 0.15 x
Fig. 20: Square root of time method
 Logarithm of Time Method
For this method, a plot of specimen deformation against log-of-time is required as shown
in Fig. 21, and the following procedure needs to be followed:
1. Extend the straight line portions of the primary and secondary consolidations to intersect
at Point A. The ordinate of A represents d100, i.e. the deformation at the end of 100%
consolidation.
2. Select times t1 and t2 on the curved portion of the initial readings (e.g. at Points B and C)
of the plot such that t2 = 4t1. Let the vertical difference (distance) of specimen
deformation during time (t2 – t1) be equal to x.
3. Draw a horizontal line DE such that the vertical distance BD is equal to x. The
deformation corresponding to the line DE is d0, i.e. the deformation at 0% consolidation.
4. Bisect the distance between d0 and d100 such that Point F is obtained on the
consolidation-time curve. The ordinate of Point F on the curve represents the
deformation at 50% primary consolidation, and its abscissa represents the corresponding
time, t50.
5. For 50% consolidation, Tv = 0.197 (see Figure 19), so:
2
Ct 0.197H d
T50  0.197  v 502 or Cv  (33)
Hd t50
It should be noted that Cv changes from one load application (vertical stress) to another, the
selected values used for the design purposes could be those that correspond to the final
effective vertical stresses anticipated in the field.
D E
d0
B x
C x
(d0 + d100)/2
Axial deformation (increase)

d50 F
d100
A
t1 t2 = 4t1 t50 Log t (minute)
Fig. 21: Logarithm of time method
Worked Example (4)
 A sample was taken from a clay layer of 7 m thick and was sent to laboratory
for a consolidation test. For a given load increment, the compression readings
were recorded as in the table below:
Time 0 0.25 0.5 1 2.25 4 6.25 9 16 25 36 49 64 81 100 300 1440
(min)
Gauge 7.82 8.20 8.32 8.46 8.68 8.86 9.03 9.15 9.27 9.35 9.4 9.43 9.46 9.48 9.49 9.54 9.62
(mm)
After 1440 minutes, the thickness of the specimen was 15 mm. Determine the
time needed for the clay layer to reach 70% and 100% consolidation, knowing
that the clay layer was underlain by a bedrock.
[Answers: Cv, = 9.7 m2/year; t70 = 2.0 years; t100 = 13.7 years]
Square Root of Time Curve for Worked Example (4)
7.5
t 90  1.7
8.5
Axial compression (mm)
9.5
10
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Sqrt t (min)
Secondary Compression Settlement
 As mentioned previously, secondary compression settlement theoretically starts
after the cease of the consolidation settlement (i.e. after the full dissipation of the
excess porewater pressures) as a result of soil creep and decomposition. The
secondary compression settlement can be calculated using the secondary
compression index, Cα, which is obtained while conducting the oedometer test
by maintaining one of the load increments beyond the completion of
consolidation settlement. The change in the void ratio after this point can be
plotted against the log time to determine Cα (see Figure 22), as follows:
ec  et
C  (34)
log( t / tc )
where,
ec = void ratio at the end of consolidation settlement which is corresponding
to time tc (see Figure 22); and
et = void ratio at time (t) after the consolidation settlement.
 The secondary compression settlement is then can be calculated as follows:
C t
Ss  H o log   (35)
1  ec  tc 
It should be noted that, in the above equation, ec could be replaced by the soil
void ratio before consolidation eo without introducing much error.
e
ec Cα
et
tc t Log (t)
Fig. 22: Determination of secondary compression index, Cα
Worked Example (5)
 For the soil in Worked Example (4), determine the expected secondary
compression settlement of the clay layer after 10 years from the primary
consolidation. It should be noted that the soil specimen used in the laboratory
has a dry mass of 50 gm, specific gravity of 2.7 and oedometer cross sectional
area of 1850 mm2.
[Answer: Cα = 0.009; Ss = 9.9 mm]
Time (min) 0 0.25 0.5 1.0 2.25 4.0 6.25 9.0 16.0 25.0 36.0 49.0 64.0 81.0 100 300 1440
Gauge readings 7.82 8.20 8.32 8.46 8.68 8.86 9.03 9.15 9.27 9.35 9.40 9.43 9.46 9.48 9.49 9.54 9.62
(mm)
Sample Height 16.8 16.42 16.3 16.16 15.94 15.76 15.59 15.47 15.35 15.27 15.22 15.19 15.16 15.14 15.13 15.08 15.00
(mm)
Void ratio, e 0.68 0.642 0.63 0.616 0.594 0.576 0.559 0.547 0.535 0.527 0.522 0.519 0.516 0.514 0.513 0.508 0.50
0.7
0.65
0.6
Void ratio, e
Cv = 0.01
0.55
0.5
ec
et
0.45
0.1 1 10 tc 100 t 1000 10000
Time (min)
Determination of Cα for Worked Example (5)
Eccentrically Loaded Foundations
 The settlement calculations described previously relate to the centrally loaded
foundations in which the footing applied pressure is uniformly distributed.
However, eccentrically loaded foundations will undergo non-uniform applied
pressure. In such a case, the settlement can be determined using the applied
pressure obtained from the effective area concept proposed by Meyerhof (1963),
which was described earlier in the bearing capacity calculations.
 The idea is to use the effective footing dimensions (B’ and L’) instead of the
original dimensions (B and L) in the calculations of the gross applied stress, to
obtain an equivalent uniformly distributed load, as follows:
Qcol  W f  Wsoil
qapp  gross (  uD ) (36) (for one-way eccentricity in B direction)
B  L
qapp  gross (  uD ) (37) (for one-way eccentricity in L direction)
B  L
qapp  gross (  uD ) (38) (for two-way eccentricity)

B L 
The net applied pressure used for settlement calculations is then determined from
the gross applied stress minus the overburden pressure.
Allowable Settlements
 In most instances, the subsoil is not homogeneous and the load carried by various
shallow foundations of a given structure can vary widely. As a result, it is
reasonable to expect varying degrees of settlement in different parts of a given
building. The differential settlement of various parts of a building can lead to
damage of the superstructure. Hence, it is important to define certain parameters to
quantify differential settlement and develop limiting values for these parameters
for desired safe performance of structures. From the information of total
settlements, the differential settlement, δ, between two foundations, or between
two points on a single foundation, can be calculated.
 Figure 23 shows a structure in which its various footings at A, B, C, D and E have
gone through some settlement. The settlement at A is AA′, and at B it is BB′, and so
on. Based on this figure the definitions of the various parameters follow:
St = total settlement at a given point;

ΔSt = difference between total settlement of any two points;
Δ = relative deflection (i.e. movement from a straight line joining two points);
Δ/L = deflection ratio.
H
B C D
A E
St(min)
E’
A’ St(max)
ΔSt(max)
D’
C’
B’
Fig. 23: Definition of parameters for differential settlement.
Allowable Settlements
 For a safe design, the total and differential settlements should not exceed certain
allowable values to avoid structural damage and achieve serviceability. These values
for various structures are given in Tables 2 and 3, respectively.
Table 2: Allowable total and differential settlements (European committee for standardization)
Parameter Value Footing and building type
Maximum allowable total settlement for serviceability, St(max) 25 mm Pad footings

50 mm Raft foundations
Maximum allowable differential settlement, ΔSt(max) 30 mm Shallow foundations in sand
40 mm Shallow foundations in clay
Table 3: Allowable deflection ratio (Δ/L) for different buildings (after Bowles, 1996)
Structure Δ/L for sand Δ/L for clay

Crane runway 0.003 0.003
Steel and concrete frames 0.002 0.002
End rows of brick-clad frame 0.0007 0.001
Multi-storey brick wall of L/H ≤ 3 0.0003 0.0004
Multi-storey brick wall of L/H ≥ 5 0.0005 0.0007
One-storey mills 0.001 0.001
Smokestacks, water tanks, ring foundations 0.004 0.004
L = building length; H = height of building above foundation.
References:
 Casagrande, A. (1936). “The determination of the preconsolidation load and
its practical significance.” Proceedings of the First International Conference
on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Vol. III, 60-64.
 Christian, J. T., and Carrier, W. D. (1978). “Janbu, Bjerrum and Kjaernsli’s
chart reinterpreted.” Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Vol. 15, 123-128.
 Das, B. (1998). Principles of geotechnical engineering, PWS Publishing
Company, Boston, MA.
 Janbu, N., Bjerrum, L., and Kjaernsli, B. (1956). “Veiledning ved losning av
fundamentering soppgaver.” Norwegian Geotechnical Institute, Publication
No. 16, 30-32.
 Meyerhof, G. G. (1963). “Shallow foundations” Journal of Soil Mechanics
and Foundation Division, 91(SM2), 21-31.
 Schmertmann, J. H., Hartman, J. P., and Brown, P. R. (1978). “Improved
strain influence factor diagrams.” Journal of Geotechnical Engineering
Division, ASCE, 104(GT8), 1131-1135.

Notes 3 - Soil Compressibility For Shallow Foundations

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Notes 3 - Soil Compressibility For Shallow Foundations

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Soil Compressibility for Geotechnical

Design of Shallow Foundations

 Consolidation Settlement (Sc): (sometimes called primary settlement) occurs in

– Janbu et al. (1956) method based on the theory of elasticity; and

Si ( rigid )  0.92 Si ( centre ) (2.2) (rigid footing)

Fig. 1: Elastic settlement of flexible and rigid foundations

Flexible vs Rigid Footings:

Table 1: Elastic parameters of various soils (Das, 1998)

Type of soil Modulus of elasticity, Es Poisson’s

500 500 500

550 550 550

600 600 600

700 700 700

750 750 750

900 900 900

Fig. 4: Typical results from the CPT apparatus

Point angle = 60o

Fig. 5: Soil classification based on CPT results

 The modulus of elasticity, Es, to be used in Schmertmann’s method depends

Layer No Depth below ground surface (m) Average qc (MPa)

 The term consolidation is reserved for the behaviour of a saturated, fine-

 The simplest consolidation is one-dimensional consolidation in which lateral

Fig. 8: The oedometer test

Table top consolidometer (ELE International)

’c Log (’c)

Fig. 10: Determination of consolidation settlement using mv and e-logσ’c method

Fig. 11: Determination of consolidation indices

Virgin compression curve

Fig. 12: Casagrande’s method of determining the preconsolidation pressure

’vo  ’p Log (’c)

Initial stress condition

Virgin compression curve

’vo  ’f  ’p Log (’c) ’vo  ’p  ’f Log (’c)

Single drainage Double drainage

Fig. 18: Computation of the length of the longest drainage path, Hd

 In order to obtain U in terms of the excess porewater pressure, Δu, it is essential

Fig. 19: U versus Tv for one-dimensional consolidation

Axial deformation (increase)

Fig. 20: Square root of time method

Axial deformation (increase)

t1 t2 = 4t1 t50 Log t (minute)

Fig. 21: Logarithm of time method

Fig. 22: Determination of secondary compression index, Cα

Determination of Cα for Worked Example (5)

St = total settlement at a given point;

Fig. 23: Definition of parameters for differential settlement.

Parameter Value Footing and building type

Maximum allowable total settlement for serviceability, St(max) 25 mm Pad footings

Structure Δ/L for sand Δ/L for clay

You might also like