HOSTED BY Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Soils and Foundations 60 (2020) 1387–1404
www.elsevier.com/locate/sandf

Technical Paper

A rational design approach to peat ground improvement by

vertical drains
Nobutaka Yamazoe a,⇑, Hiroyuki Tanaka b, Hirochika Hayashi c, Satoshi Nishimura d
a
Department of Civil Engineering and Architecture, National Institute of Technology, Akita College, Akita, Japan
b
Emeritus Professor, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan
c
Civil Engineering Research Institute for Cold Region, Sapporo, Japan
d
Faculty of Engineering, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan

Received 22 January 2020; received in revised form 30 June 2020; accepted 23 August 2020
Available online 6 November 2020

Abstract

Use of the vertical drain method (hereinafter called ‘‘VD”) in peat ground is spreading to reduce residual settlement and increase
strength by accelerating consolidation. In recent years, high embankments of nearly 10 m have been constructed on peat ground by using
a combination of VDs, or plastic-board drains (PBDs) in particular, and various ground stabilization techniques. However, the conven-
tional design methods include a number of unclear points. This paper focuses on the significant stress-dependency of coefficient of con-
solidation in peat, and describes a rational design approach to evaluating the long-term settlement and stability of foundation ground of
VD-improved peat ground by modifying conventional design methods. The effect of VDs was evaluated from field observations on the
settlement of test embankments constructed in Hokkaido, Japan, and simulations using the finite-element method were performed to
interpret the behavior of the ground. A systematic series of parametric analyses demonstrated that, in peat ground with a high natural
water content, the permeability decreases drastically as the load increases, and hence the residual settlement increases significantly and
the stability is greatly reduced. Therefore, drain pitch needs to be considerably small under such conditions. Despite its common use in
the conventional design of vertical drains, the accuracy of Barron’s solution is naturally limited in peat ground with high natural water
contents since it assumes a constant value for the coefficient of consolidation.
Ó 2020 Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of The Japanese Geotechnical Society. This is an open access article under the CC BY-
NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Keywords: Peat; Vertical drain method; Coefficient of consolidation; Settlement; Stability

1. Introduction this type of soft ground (Civil Engineering Research

In the Hokkaido and Tohoku regions located in north-
ern Japan, peat is widely distributed, and poses geotechni-
cal challenges including very large consolidation settlement
and slip failure. Use of vertical drains (hereinafter called
‘‘VDs”) is spreading as an effective countermeasure against
Peer review under responsibility of The Japanese Geotechnical Society.
⇑ Corresponding author at: Department of Civil Engineering and
Architecture, National Institute of Technology, Akita College, 1-1,
Iijima-Bunkyo-cho, Akita 011-8511, Japan.
E-mail address: yamazoe@akita-nct.ac.jp (N. Yamazoe).
Institute for Cold Region, 2017). In this technique, VDs
are installed vertically in the ground, and excess pore water
pressure is allowed to quickly dissipate in the horizontal
direction toward them. It is thus possible to accelerate con-
solidation, increase the shear strength early and reduce the
residual settlement (defined as the settlement after start of
infrastructure service). In recent years, in order to reduce
costs, construction of embankments of nearly 10 m high
have been reported on peat ground by combining use of
plastic-board drains (PBDs) and other stabilization or rein-
forcement methods (geotextile, vacuum consolidation,
counterweight fill, etc.; e.g. Hayashi et al., 2006). However,

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sandf.2020.08.009
0038-0806/Ó 2020 Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of The Japanese Geotechnical Society.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
 N. Yamazoe et al. Soils and Foundations 60 (2020) 1387–1404

Nomenclature

Cc compression index Ck hydraulic conductivity index

Cs swelling index m Poisson’s ratio
e0 initial void ratio Μ critical state parameter
mv coefficient of volume compressibility pc consolidation yield stress
kv hydraulic conductivity (vertical direction) r0 vi effective overburden pressure
kh hydraulic conductivity (horizontal direction) OCR over-consolidation ratio
kv0 initial hydraulic conductivity (vertical direction) K0NC, K0OC coefficient of earth pressure at rest of nor-
cv coefficient of consolidation (vertical direction) mally, over-consolidated region
ch coefficient of consolidation (horizontal direc-
tion)

there are many unclear points in the consolidation solidation and the secondary consolidation due to
behavior of peats under relatively high embankments and viscosity (Yamazoe et al., 2017; Tanaka et al., 2019). The
the validity of the conventional design methods for VDs. latter factor becomes increasingly relevant in describing
Most of the analysis techniques for these problems in use longer-term behaviors. However, analysis with isotach-
today are based on Barron’s solution (Barron, 1948). type viscosity indicated that its influence is relatively minor
This study focuses on the peculiar consolidation charac- for the time scale considered in this paper (1–1.5 years).
teristics of peats, whose coefficient of consolidation Strictly speaking, the residual settlement should be evalu-
decreases significantly with an increase of the consolidation ated by considering the compression of all the soft layers.
stress, and examines the effects of this feature on long-term However, the main cause of the problem in the long-term
settlement and stability. There are significant points to note is the highly compressible peat layer.
when adopting Barron’ solution. Firstly, analysis was per-
formed on test embankments on peat ground with detailed 2. Consolidation characteristics and long-term settlement of
measurements including settlement and excess pore water peat
pressure, and the consolidation-accelerating effect of VDs
was confirmed. Following the analysis, a simple evaluation The coefficient of consolidation cv of peats is known to
of stability of the underlying peat ground was performed. be highly stress-dependent (Yamazoe et al., 2011). Fig. 1
In addition, through analysis to simulate the behaviour shows an example comparing the coefficient of consolida-
of the test embankments, the accuracy of the used numer- tion of peat and clay in Hokkaido, Japan. The cv value
ical model/conditions and the validity of the determination in the normal consolidation region (i.e. range of the vertical
method of the parameters were examined. A systematic effective stress larger than the consolidation yield stress pc)
parametric analysis was then performed by changing the fill
load and ground conditions. Based on these results, this
paper discusses the occurrence of long-term settlement
and the decrease in stability in peat due to the reduction
of the coefficient of consolidation under VD-improved con-
ditions. Furthermore, the applicability of Barron’s solu-
tion, which assumes that coefficient of consolidation is
constant, in practice is discussed.
In the analysis performed in this paper, the following
simplification is made in order to clarify the influence of
the stress-dependency of the coefficient of consolidation
on the consolidation settlement of peat ground.

(1) The FEM analysis used in this study does not con-
sider long-term creep compression (secondary
consolidation).
(2) Residual settlement is evaluated only for the peat
layer.
Fig. 1. Comparison of the coefficient of consolidation between peat
The long-term settlement of the peat layer can be attrib- (natural water content wn = 864%, ignition loss Li = 93%) and clay
uted to the pressure-dependency of the coefficient of con- (wn = 69%, plasticity index Ip = 68).
1388
 N. Yamazoe et al. Soils and Foundations 60 (2020) 1387–1404

Fig. 2. Difference in the consolidation settlement behavior of peat and

clay ground.

is almost constant for clay. In the case of peat, however,

the initial cv value is as large as about 106 m2/sec, but it
greatly decreases with increasing vertical effective stress. Fig. 3. Pressure dependence of cv in the normal consolidation region.
For example, when the vertical effective stress reaches
200 kN/m2, it is 1/7 times the clay’s (approximately
5  109 m2/sec). Thus, the cv value of peat shows a
increment of cv against the effective stress is as follows
remarkable stress-dependency.
(Fig. 3).
Fig. 2 is a schematic illustration of the consolidation
behavior anticipated from the above-mentioned consolida- Dðlog cv Þ

 ¼ ð1  C c =C k Þ ð2Þ
tion characteristics. Since the peat has a large cv value at D log r0v
the beginning of consolidation, the initial settlement rate
is very large. Contrary to this, cv is smaller in peat than Therefore, Cc/Ck = 1 (D(logcv)/D(logr0 v) = 0) for clay
in clay at the end of consolidation, therefore the settlement with constant cv during consolidation. In contrast, Cc/
rate becomes smaller. Consequently, when the peat with Ck > 1 (D(logcv)/D(logr0 v) < 0) for peats whose cv greatly
strongly stress-dependent cv is subject to loading by a high decreases with increasing r0 v.
embankment from initially high natural water content, pri-
mary consolidation is significant and may occur apparently
for longer time than expected, or equivalently, increase in
shear strength of the peat ground may be delayed. In addi-
tion, it is necessary to recognize that there are limitations to
the applicability of Terzaghi’s or Barron’s solutions to
ground with such consolidation characteristics, as they
assume a constant coefficient of consolidation.
The coefficient of consolidation cv, which controls the
consolidation rate, is defined by the following equation.
cv ¼ k=ðmv cw Þ ð1Þ

where k: the hydraulic conductivity, mv: the coefficient of

volume compressibility, and cw: the unit weight of water.
Assuming that the e-logr0 v and e-logkv relationships (e:
void ratio) in the normally consolidation region are linear Fig. 4. Relationship between initial value of the hydraulic conductivity kv0
and denoting their slopes by Cc and Ck, respectively, the and ignition loss Li.
1389
 N. Yamazoe et al.
Fig. 5. Relationship between Cc/Ck and ignition loss Li.
Fig. 4 shows the relationship between the initial (i.e. as
retrieved from ground) values of the hydraulic conductivity
in the vertical direction kv0 obtained from consolidation
tests and ignition loss Li for peats in Hokkaido (Hayashi
et al., 2008; Yamazoe et al., 2011). Although there is a large
variation, logkv0 tends to increase linearly with increasing
Li. Fig. 5 shows the relationship between Cc/Ck and Li
(Hayashi et al., 2008; Yamazoe et al., 2011). Similar to
kv0, the variation is large, but Cc/Ck increases as Li
increases. Therefore, peats containing a large amount of
undegraded fiber, or peat with large Li, exhibit remarkable
Fig. 6. Plan view and longitudinal section of the foundation ground at the Toubetsu site.
1390
Soils and Foundations 60 (2020) 1387–1404
stress-dependency of the coefficient of consolidation. Fig. 4
and Fig. 5 also plot the data at the test embankment site
described below. They show the same trend as the other
data.
3. Test imbankments
3.1. Test setup
In this chapter, the effect of ground improvement by
VDs is reviewed from field observation results of the test
embankments. The test embankments were constructed in
Tobetsu town, Ishikari-gun, Hokkaido, Japan. Fig. 6 is a
plan view of the test embankments and longitudinal section
of the foundation ground obtained from boring survey and
various types of sounding. Fig. 7 is a transverse cross sec-
tion at SP53,240, shown with the shape of the embank-
ment. These figures show the N-value and tip resistance
qc obtained from the standard penetration test (SPT) and
the dutch cone penetration test (CPT), respectively. The
N-value and qc value from the ground surface to the depth
of about 20 m (Ap layer-Ac layer) are very small, indicat-
ing that a thick soft soil layer is deposited. The total length
of the test embankments is approximately 210 m, and there
were sections with and without VDs. The drain material
used for VD was plastic board (i.e. PBDs). The VDs were
 N. Yamazoe et al.
Fig. 7. Transverse cross section of the foundation ground and the
embankment at the Toubetsu site (SP53,240).
installed down to the bottom of the soft clay layer (Ac).
The VDs were arranged in a square pattern in plan, and
the interval was set at either d = 0.7, 0.9 or 1.1 m. At
d = 0.7 m, two different products of VD with different
materials were used to investigate the influence of the dif-
ference in the internal structure of VDs on improvement
efficacy.
The soil layers were almost horizontal at the site, and
the spatial variation in geotechnical characteristics was rel-
atively small. Therefore, the analysis to reproduce the
behavior of the test embankments in Section 4.1 assumed
the cross section shown in Fig. 7 as a representative cross
section. Each test embankment section was instrumented
with various monitoring systems, as shown in Fig. 7, and
Fig. 8. Profiles of geotechnical properties.
1391
Soils and Foundations 60 (2020) 1387–1404
the settlement of the embankments, pore water pressure
in the foundation layer, and surrounding ground displace-
ment were measured.
The construction process involved laying a 0.7 m-thick
sand mat before the embankment construction. After that,
in the construction section with VDs, VDs were installed in
the foundation ground, and then the embankment was con-
structed. The thickness of each test embankment including
the sand mat was about 5 m. The construction rate of the
embankment was 40 mm/day until the thickness of the
embankment reached 3.5 m. However, above 3.5 m, the
foundation ground became unstable in the embankment
without VDs, and therefore the construction rate of all
the test embankments was reduced to 15 mm/day. Due to
constraints in project time, monitoring was terminated
about one year after the sand mat was laid.
3.2. Ground characteristics
Fig. 8 shows the profiles of geotechnical properties. The
top 5 m of the foundation ground was a peat layer (Ap).
Layer Ap consists of a fibrous peat with natural water con-
tent wn = 400–700% and ignition loss Li = 50–90%. An
organic clay layer (Aco) which irregularly contains thin
peat seams was underlying Layer Ap, with a thickness of
about 3 m. Layer Aco typically had wn = 100–200% and
Li = 20–30%, with the peat seams locally of wn = 350–
450%. The upper sand layer (As) deposited in the middle
is mainly made up of fine sand and its thickness was 4 m.
From in-situ permeability tests, the hydraulic conductivity
was measured to be 1.4  105 m/s. The clay layer (Ac)
under Layer As was relatively homogeneous, with
wn = 50% and a thickness of 11 m. Fine sand seams were
occasionally included in Layer Ac. The lower sand layer
(Ds) distributed under Ac was a dense and stable layer,
 N. Yamazoe et al. Soils and Foundations 60 (2020) 1387–1404

Table 1
Parameters, yield and initial stress used for analysis of test embankments.
Parameter Values and sources
Consolidation characteristics Cc 7.37 Refer to Fig. 9(a) (Cs  Cc/10)
Cs 0.74
e0 12.5
kv0 (m/s) 3.5  108
Ck 3.85
Shear characteristics m 0.2 General value
Μ 1.86 Μ = 6sin /0 /(3–sin /0 ) /0 =0.19Li + 32; Hayashi et al. (2005)
Yield and initial stress pc (kN/m2) 15 Refer to Fig. 9(a)
r0 vi (kN/m2) 6.2
OCR 2.4 OCR = pc/r0 vi
K0NC 0.29 K0NC = 1–sin/0 ; Jaky (1948)
K0OC 0.59 K0OC = K0NC OCRm; Schmidt (1966)
m = 0.005Li + 0.45; Hayashi et al. (2012)

with SPT N-value of 7–10, that can be considered as a free-
drainage boundary in this cross section. From a compar-
ison of the effective overburden pressure and the consolida-
tion yield stress pc, the soft layer was in normal
consolidation or lightly over consolidated. The angles of
shear resistance /0 were obtained from consolidated-
undrained triaxial compression tests. The values of /0 for
the peat were much smaller than the value obtained using
the empirical equation for estimating /0 from Li shown in
Table 1. These ground conditions are typical in peaty soft

Fig. 9. Consolidation characteristics and modeling; (a) Peat (Ap), (b) Clay (Ac).
1392
 N. Yamazoe et al. Soils and Foundations 60 (2020) 1387–1404

ground in Hokkaido, Japan, where peat and organic clay
are found at the top, immediately underlain by a sand layer
and further by a thick clay layer.
3.3. Consolidation characteristics of peat and clay
Fig. 9 shows the consolidation characteristics of the peat
layer (Ap) and clay layer (Ac). In the figure, past test
results obtained within 1 km of the test site are also
included for reference. A compression curve modeled for
the FEM analysis performed in Section 4.1 is also shown.
The Ap layer was modeled based on past test data with nat-
ural water content wn (=initial water content) of 585–
648%. As shown in Fig. 8, wn of these data is more typical
of this soil layer. The Ac layer was largely homogeneous
but containing occasional fine sand seams. In one of the
two test cases, the fine fraction content was Fc = 89%, indi-
cating sand content as large as 11%. Modeling was per-
formed excluding this test case. In the figure,
approximate ranges of expected changes due to embank-
ment construction are also indicated based on calculation
of the vertical total stress increment by Boussinesq’s solu-
tion. From these figures, it can be seen that peat (Ap)
has a considerably larger typical initial void ratio e0 and

Fig. 10. Compressive strain e and excess pore water pressure u observed in the Ap layer; (a) Without VDs, (b) With VDs (drain interval d = 1.1 m), (c)
With VDs (d = 0.9 m), (d) With VDs (d = 0.7 m).
1393
 N. Yamazoe et al.
compression index Cc than clay (Ac). In addition, although
the peat had a very large e0, the hydraulic conductivity kv
was quite small, and it decreases by about two orders due
to a stress increment caused by the embankment construc-
tion. As discussed earlier, the coefficient of consolidation cv
is constant for clay in normal compression, while it signif-
icantly decreases for peat with larger r0 v.
3.4. Field test results and observation
Fig. 10 shows changes with time of the compressive
strain e and excess pore water pressure u in the peat layer
(Ap) with and without VDs. The results with VDs
(Fig. 10(b)–(d)) are shown with the analysis results that will
be described in detail in Section 4.1. Fig. 11 shows the lat-
eral displacement along depth at the toe of the embank-
ment measured with borehole inclinometers, for the
moments of the embankment height reaching 3.5 m and
the final height, 5 m.
In the case without VDs, as shown in Fig. 10(a), the
embankment was initially constructed at a construction
rate of 40 mm/day. Then the excess pore water pressure u
suddenly increased with the occurrence of e, and the lateral
displacement also increased when the embankment height
was 3.5 m (Fig. 11(a)). At the site, the judgment was that
the foundation ground was about to fail, and the construc-
tion pace was reduced from 40 mm/day to 15 mm/day. As
a result, u decreased and the increase in lateral displace-
ment slowed down. However, u remained above zero even
after 300 days, possibly resulting in the continuous genera-
tion of e with the further dissipation of u dissipates.
Fig. 11. Observed lateral displacement along depth at the toe of the
embankment (the start of embankment construction); (a) Without VDs,
(b) With VDs (drain interval d = 0.7 m).
1394
Soils and Foundations 60 (2020) 1387–1404
In the ground improved with the VDs (Fig. 10(b)-(d)),
the final e values reached about 35%. The u values at the
time when the thickness of embankment was 3.5 m were
20 kN/m2 at maximum, less than a half of that observed
without VDs. This difference indicates that VDs were effec-
tive even in peat ground where large compressive strain was
generated. The lateral displacement was greatly suppressed
(Fig. 11(b)). Therefore, the strength of the foundation
ground is expected to be greatly increased. In the test
embankment with d = 0.7 m, where two different products
of VDs were used, there was almost no difference in the
consolidation settlement and excess pore water pressure
behavior (Fig. 10(d)).
The construction rate of the embankments at the VD-
improved locations was reduced in accordance with the
unimproved case, where the failure seemed imminent. This
reduction of loading rate in all the cases made the potential
difference in the residual settlement between the cases less
visible. The limited project time duration also restricted
long-term monitoring after the construction. For this rea-
son, a difference in residual settlement could not be clearly
recognized between the cases. Accordingly, the above
points will be examined in the numerical analysis described
in Chapter 4.
3.5. Stability of foundation ground
One of the effects expected from the improvement with
VDs is to increase the stability of the foundation ground.
The stability of embankments and the soft ground beneath
is usually evaluated by the Fellenius method. This method
assumes a circular slip surface and calculates the safety fac-
tor from the ratio of the sliding moment to the resistance
moment caused by the shear strength on the slip surface.
In this paper, however, the stability is evaluated by a sim-
pler method using (um/q)c (Eq.(5), as described below),
which expresses the generation ratio of excess pore water
pressure, instead of using the Fellenius method, which is
computationally cumbersome.
Here, the assumptions involved in the approximate eval-
uation of the stability are as follows.
(1) The position and radius of the circular slip were
assumed as shown in Fig. 12. The lower end of the
circular slip surface passes through the lower end of
the Ap layer (the boundary between layers Ap and
Aco). Usually, the stability is calculated for multiple
circular slip surfaces, and the result with the lowest
stability is adopted. However, this paper uses the
above fixed same circular slip surface, which is close
to the critical mechanisms in many situations.
(2) When shear failure occurs, tension cracks often occur
at the top of the embankment. To be conservative,
the shear strength of the embankment is ignored.
(3) Since peat is deposited near the surface (Fig. 7), it is
assumed that the dispersion of the load q in the peat
layer is small. From this assumption, Dr0 v is Dr0 v =-
 N. Yamazoe et al.
Fig. 12. Bearing capacity of circular slip surface by approximation of the
problem.
Drv–um  q–um (Dr0 v, Drv, um: vertical effective stress
increment, vertical total stress increment and average
excess pore water pressure generated in the ground).
Based on the above assumptions (1) and (2), for conve-
nience, the embankment and foundation ground are mod-
eled as shown in Fig. 12. The foundation ground is divided
into two areas, and the undrained shear strength of each
area is denoted by su and su0. Here, su increases due to
the surcharge load, while the effect is ignored on su0. The
bearing capacity qb (which is obtained from the upper
bound theorem) when the uniformly distributed strip load
is loaded on this soft ground is given by the following equa-
tion from Appendix A.
qb ¼ 2:76ðsu þ su0 Þ
The dependence of su on the effective stress is shown in
Fig. 13 and expressed in form,
0 based on (um/q)c as follows.
su ¼ mrv
where m: shear strength ratio and r0 v: the effective vertical
stress. In Fig. 13, r0 vi: initial vertical effective stress (effec-
tive overburden pressure), pc: consolidation yield stress,
U: degree of consolidation. Substituting Eq.(4) into Eq.
(3), and considering the above assumption (3), when q
reaches qb, (um/q)c becomes as follows.
0
ðum =qÞc ¼ 1  1=ð2:76mÞ þ ðrvi þ su0 =mÞ=qb
Soils and Foundations 60 (2020) 1387–1404
Fig. 13. Increase in shear strength due to consolidation.
Fig. 14. Relationship between the bearing capacity qb and (um/q)c.
Fig. 14 shows the relationship between the load q and
(um/q)c of the test embankments. Here, m = 0.40, and from
the tip resistance of cone penetration tests qc (Fig. 8), su0
(qc (kN/m2)/20, Civil Engineering Research Institute for
Cold Region, 2017) = 7.5 kN/m2, and the average value
for r0 vi was estimated as 6.2 kN/m2. The (um/q)c value
depends on qb, and (um/q)c is about 1 at qb = 30 kN/m2.
However, it decreases to about 0.6 when qb = 50 kN/m2,
and further to about 0.25 when qb = 100 kN/m2. Thus,
when qb is small, even if um rises as much as qb, the foun-
dation ground does not be fail due to the initial value of
ð3Þ
undrained shear strength su0. However, when qb is large,
shear failure occurs even when um is relatively small.
The stability of the foundation ground is evaluated
ð4Þ
 The load q is applied on the foundation ground, and the
excess pore water pressure u is measured at a certain
position in the soil layer.
 u depends on the distance from the drainage boundary
(vertical direction for cases without VDs, horizontal
direction for cases with VDs). In order to evaluate sta-
bility, it is necessary to understand the average strength
ð5Þ of the soil layer through which the slip surface passes.
1395
 N. Yamazoe et al.
Therefore, the average value um of the soil layer is calcu-
lated from u. The method of calculating um from u mea-
sured by an installed pore water pressure sensor is
described in Appendix B (for the cases without VDs)
and Appendix C (for the cases with VDs).
 From the above, um/q at in-situ can be obtained.
 Next, from Eq.(5), (um/q)c corresponding to the bearing
capacity qb is given.
 The stability of the foundation ground is evaluated as
stable when um/q  (um/q)c and unstable when um/q >
(um/q)c.
As mentioned above, the derivation of (um/q)c is based
on several assumptions, but it captures the overall nature
of the stability problem. In the following, the validity of
Eq.(5) is examined through analysis of the test embank-
ment of without VDs where signs of failure were observed,
and the test embankments improved by VDs with installa-
tion interval d = 1.1 m.
Fig. 15. Change of um/q and (um/q)c of test embankments with time; (a)
Without VDs, (b) With VDs (installation interval d = 1.1 m).
1396
Soils and Foundations 60 (2020) 1387–1404
Fig. 15 shows changes with time of um/q and (um/q)c in
the peat layer (Ap) with and without VDs.
In the test embankment without VDs, as described
above, signs of failure were confirmed when the thickness
of the embankment reached around 3.5 m. As can be seen
from Fig. 15(a), um/q increased significantly with the con-
struction of the embankment, reaching a maximum on
day 140 when the thickness of the embankment reached
3.5 m, and this state continued until about day 160. (um/
q)c gradually decreases after 100 days and overlaps with
um/q on about day 140 to 160. In this way, the time when
(um/q)c overlaps with um/q corresponds well to the time
when the foundation ground becomes unstable. In the test
embankment, the construction rate was reduced to 15 mm/-
day after 160 days in order to improve the stability of the
foundation ground. As a result, excess pore water pressure
was dissipated and the significantly lower value of um/q
than (um/q)c from this stage onward contributed to
improved stability.
As can be seen from Fig. 15(b), the pore water pressure
response under the test embankment with VDs differed sig-
nificantly from that of the case without VDs, and um/q was
much smaller than (um/q)c even when the thickness of the
embankment reached around 3.5 m (about 160 days). In
this way, embankment construction was performed with
higher stability.
From the above, Eq.(5) is likely to offer reasonable eval-
uation of the stability. The validity of (um/q)c as instability
criterion needs to be further verified through the analysis of
other cases of failure, although the authors currently have
no such examples of failed embankment construction with
reliable pore water pressure measurement.
4. Long-term settlement behavior and evaluation of stability
of ground improved by vd
4.1. Analysis to reproduce behavior of test embankments
This chapter presents a suite of systematic parametric
analyses with various conditions using FEM in order to
evaluate the long-term settlement behavior and stability
of the peat ground improved by VDs. Since the analysis
results strongly depend on the analysis method and param-
eters used for it, this section examines the validity of the
adopted modeling by referring to the behavior of the test
embankments. The FEM analysis was performed for all
the soft layers (Ap, Aco and Ac), but only the results for
the Ap layer are described.
In the FEM analysis, it was assumed that a K0-condition
was almost satisfied at the middle depth of the soil layers
along the centerline of the embankment. Considering a sin-
gle VD among the VD group, a unit cell of soil-VD system
along the centerline is modeled under axisymmetric condi-
tions, as shown in Fig. 16. In this modeling, the drain area
of single VD installed in a square pattern was approxi-
mated as an equivalent circle of diameter de with an equal
 N. Yamazoe et al. Soils and Foundations 60 (2020) 1387–1404

resistance seemed too low for peat. They were therefore

Fig. 16. Finite element mesh of unit soil-VD cell for single soil layer (Case
of d = 1.1 m).
area as the square (‘effective’ circle) in the plan view using
the following equation.
d e ¼ 1:13d ð6Þ
The VDs themselves had a rectangular cross section,
and this was approximated as a circular cross section with
a diameter dw = 0.05 m.
The bottom boundary was fixed in the vertical direction
and the left and right boundaries were fixed in the horizon-
tal direction. As hydraulic boundaries, zero excess pore
water pressure was prescribed along the left boundary
where the VD was installed, and the others were set as
undrained boundaries. The q value (increment of vertical
total stress) was obtained by using the Boussinesq solution
according to the record of embankment construction. The
q value was reduced by considering the buoyancy acting on
the embankment deeper than the groundwater level due to
settlement. The mechanical behavior of the soils was
expressed by a Modified Cam Clay Model (Roscoe and
Burland, 1968). In case the VD is much longer than the
radius of the effective circle, as in the test embankments,
it is considered that uniform settlement occurs along the
upper boundary. In the analysis, the vertical displacement
of each node along the upper boundary was made equal.
This method of tying the degree of freedom of nodes is
called ‘‘repeatability” (Zienkiewicz and Scott, 1972).
The parameters values used in the analysis were deter-
mined from the soil test results as explained in Table 1.
General values were used for some parameters. As shown
in Fig. 8, the values provided by the consolidated-
undrained triaxial compression tests for the angle of shear
calculated from the ignition loss Li using an empirical
equation. The anisotropy of the hydraulic conductivity
was set at kh/kv = 2 (kv, kh: vertical, and horizontal
hydraulic conductivity) based on constant-head permeabil-
ity tests reported by Tada et al (2019) for peats from the
same region.
The stress-dependency of coefficient of consolidation in
peat can be given as Cc/Ck > 1 as shown in Eq.(2). As
shown in Table 1, Cc/Ck of the peat layer at test embank-
ment is 1.92. The hydraulic conductivity k in the FEM
analysis depends on the void ratio e as shown in the follow-
ing equation (Tavenas et al., 1983).
e0  e ¼ C k ðlog k 0  log k Þ ð7Þ
where Ck is the hydraulic conductivity index and k0 is the
hydraulic conductivity at the void ratio e0.
The results of FEM analysis are shown in Fig. 10(b)–(d).
In all the analysis results, the measured values of the com-
pressive strain e and excess pore water pressure u were well
reproduced. Therefore, it is concluded that the accuracy of
the proposed model and analysis method are sufficient for
describing the problem.
4.2. Parametric analysis
Having confirmed the accuracy of the FEM analysis, a
suite of parametric analysis with various analysis condi-
tions was performed and discussed in this section to inves-
tigate the long-term settlement behavior of the peat ground
improved by VDs and the effect of drain installation inter-
val d on the settlement reduction.
Assuming a typical peat ground in Hokkaido, the mod-
eled ground has peat in a normally consolidated state with
a thickness of 5 m deposited near the surface. The ground-
water level is at 1 m depth. Since the saturated unit weight
of peat is almost the same as that of water (about 10 kN/
m3), the effective overburden pressure r0 vi before loading
was set to 10 kN/m2 and was constant along depth. The
applied surcharge loads were qf = 50, 100 and 150 kN/
m2, and the loading rate was 1 kN/m2/day (corresponding
to the construction rate of 50 mm/day). The natural water

Table 2
Parameters, yield and initial stress used for parametric analysis.
Case Case1 Case2 Case3 Sources
wn (%) 200 500 1000
Li (%) 30 60 90 General value
Cc 2.0 5.0 10.0 Cc = 0.01wn; Hayashi et al., (2005)
Cs 0.4 1.0 2.0 Refer Table 1 (Cs = Cc/10)
e0 4.7 9.6 14.9 e0=(wn/100) /{0.03(wn/100) + 0.37}Oikawa and Ishikawa (1993)
kv0 (m/s) 2.3  108 6.5  108 1.9  107 Refer to Fig. 4
Ck 1.30 2.40 3.82 Refer to Fig. 5
m 0.2 Refer to Table 1
Μ 1.54 1.78 2.02 From the empirical formula in Table 1
pc (kN/m2) 10 As in the text
OCR 1.0 OCR = pc/r0 vi
K0NC 0.53 0.46 0.39 Theoretical value of the modified Cam clay model under K0 condition

1397
 N. Yamazoe et al. Soils and Foundations 60 (2020) 1387–1404

content was set at 3 values (wn = 200, 500 and 1000%). The
parameters were determined as shown in Table 2 with ref-
erence to Table 1.
For each analysis case with different natural water con-
tent ratio wn, mechanical parameters including Cc are
determined with the empirical formula (Table 2) and used
in the analysis. For peats, wn is treated as an inherent prop-
erty rather than a state variable, based on the following
observation. Fig. 17 shows the relationship between the
specific gravity of solid part Gs and wn, where the empirical
relationship between e0 and wn shown in Table 2 and the
assumption of full saturation are used along with
e = wn/100Gs. It is known that Gs of clay is almost constant
regardless of wn. As shown in Fig. 17, however, Gs of peat
decreases as wn increases. The solid part of peat contains
clay minerals and plant remains. The reason for the
decrease in Gs with increasing wn is that the proportion
of plant remains is large. Thus, wn is not only a state vari-
able reflecting an effective overburden pressure but also an
inherent property correlated to peat’s composition.
The initial values of the hydraulic conductivity kv0 (ver-
tical direction) and Cc/Ck, which are parameters related to
the consolidation rate, were obtained by using the expres-
sion between them and Li shown in Fig. 4 and Fig. 5.
Regression to obtain values of coefficient of consolidation
cv is shown in Fig. 18. For reference, the results of consol-
idation tests on the test embankments are also included in
the figure. However, peat with a natural water content of
about 1000% was not encountered around the test embank-
ments site. Therefore, data from other sites in Hokkaido
are shown.
From these figures, it can be seen that cv strongly
depends on the consolidation stress in peat with a high
wn. Therefore, when a high embankment is constructed

Fig. 18. Regression of coefficient of consolidation cv; (a) wn = 200%, (b)

Fig. 17. Relationship between Gs and wn. wn = 500%, (c) wn = 1000%.

1398
 N. Yamazoe et al.
on peat ground with large wn, it is estimated that long-term
settlement (primary consolidation) will occur beyond the
time scale anticipated from the initial behavior, due to a
decrease in cv.
4.3. Analysis results and discussion
4.3.1. Main analysis results
The variations of the degree of consolidation for strain
Ue (=et/ef, et and ef: compressive strain at time t and final
Fig. 19. Effect of qf on consolidation settlement behavior (drain instal-
lation interval d = 1.1 m); (a) wn = 200%, (b) wn = 1000%.
1399
Soils and Foundations 60 (2020) 1387–1404
compressive strain due to qf) and um/q (obtained by nor-
malizing the average excess pore water pressure um with
the load q) with time are shown in Fig. 19 for natural water
content wn = 200% and 1000% and drain installation inter-
val of d = 1.1 m.
In the case of wn = 200% (Fig. 19(a)), a normalized
excess pore water pressure of um/q = 0.45–0.6 is generated
when the loading is completed, and this becomes smaller as
q becomes larger. After loading, um dissipates smoothly
and is almost zero after 500 days. In the case of
wn = 1000%, as shown in Fig. 19(b), normalized excess
pore water pressure of um/q = 0.5–0.6 was generated at
the time when the loading was completed, and um/q at this
moment increased with an increase in q. The dissipation of
um after that is slower when q is larger, and in the case of
qf = 150 kN/m2, um/q remains considerably large even after
500 days. This difference between the wn = 200% and
1000% cases is explained by the fact that, as seen in
Fig. 18, the coefficient of consolidation decreased more sig-
nificantly with the progress of consolidation in peat with
wn = 1000%.
4.3.2. Residual settlement
There are several definitions of residual settlement. For
example, (1) the settlement that occurs after construction
of the structure, (2) the settlement that occurs after the
start of service, and (3) the settlement that occurs at a
specific time. In this paper, the authors adopted (2), as
shown in Fig. 20. The reason is as follows. It is extremely
difficult to reduce the residual settlement to zero in reality,
and even if possible, the time and cost required for the mea-
sures are significant. In general, therefore, the long-term
settlement (residual settlement) that occurs after the start
of service is allowed to some degree according to the
importance of the structure, and the structure is used while
maintenance and repairs are carried out against long-term
settlement. In the design of VDs, this concept of residual
settlement is taken into consideration and the drain inter-
val d is determined to satisfy a settlement requirement at
the start of service.
Fig. 20. Definition of residual settlement.
 N. Yamazoe et al. Soils and Foundations 60 (2020) 1387–1404

A specified value of residual settlement depends on a Fig. 22 shows the relationship between um/q at the time
design manual to be referred to and the importance of when the loading was completed and the drain interval d.
structures. For example, in Manual on countermeasures Fig. 22(a) shows the result of qf = 50 kN/m2, and (b) shows
for peat ground (Civil Engineering Research Institute for
Cold Region, 2017), the specified value of the residual set-
tlement is Sr = 100 mm in urban areas and at structure
boundaries, such as embankment/abutment boundaries.
The time required to reach this Sr is defined as tr (see
Fig. 20), and the values for tr when Sr = 100 mm, calcu-
lated in the above analysis, are shown in Fig. 21.
Since the drain method is adopted to promote consoli-
dation, tr is usually set to relatively short time, such as
about 1–1.5 years (365–550 days). From these figures, it
can be seen that the peat with natural water content ratio
wn = 500% or more tend to increase time tr for Sr = 100 mm
well beyond this requirement (Fig. 21(b), (c)). This is
because the coefficient of consolidation decreases rapidly
as the load qf increases for peats with larger wn. In such
cases, it is necessary to considerably reduce the interval d
of VDs. On the contrary, in case of wn = 200%, tr does
not depend as much on the magnitude of qf as in case of
wn = 500% or more (Fig. 21(a)).
When a high embankment is constructed on peat
ground with a high water content, it is necessary to deter-
mine d of VD appropriately, with a greatest care of
decrease of coefficient of consolidation due to increase of
consolidation stress.
The construction period of the test embankments
described in Chapter 3 was one year. The natural water
content of the peat layer found at the test embankments
is about 500% (Fig. 8), and the final load qf after subtract-
ing the buoyancy to the embankment that subsided deeper
than the groundwater level was qf = 65 kN/m2. If a design
condition includes, for example, tr = 365 days for Sr = 100-
mm, the drain interval d of VDs that satisfies this specifica-
tion is about d = 1.5 m as read from Fig. 21(b). In the test
construction, as mentioned above, the construction rate
was reduced because there were signs of failure during con-
struction in the adjacent section without VDs. Accurate
evaluation of residual settlement was therefore difficult.
From the results of this parametric analysis, however, it
can be concluded that d (1.1 m or less) set in the test con-
struction was generally appropriate from the viewpoint of
residual settlement.

4.3.3. Stability of foundation ground

The parametric analysis results can also be used to
examine the stability of the foundation ground. The excess
pore water pressure ratio um/q, averaged over the unit cell,
is used to discuss stability, as demonstrated in Section 3.5,
where um/q was defined by dividing the average excess pore
water pressure um generated during the embankment con-
struction by the load q. When the foundation ground
becomes unstable, Eq. (5) yields (um/q)c  0.5 at qf = 50
kN/m2, and (um/ q)c  0.3 at qf = 100 kN/m2, assuming
that the shear strength ratio is m = 0.4 and the initial Fig. 21. Time tr when the specified residual settlement is Sr = 100 mm; (a)
undrained shear strength su0 = mr0 vi. wn = 200%, wn = 500%, (c) wn = 1000%.
1400
 N. Yamazoe et al.
the result of qf = 100 kN/m2. From Fig. 22(a), in order to
stably load qf = 50 kN/m2 only by promoting consolida-
tion with VDs, d = 1.0 m or less is required in the case
of wn = 200%. Against this, the embankment can be con-
structed stably even with d = 1.5 m in the case of
wn = 1000%. For qf = 100 kN/m2, the stability cannot be
ensured unless d is made very small, as Fig. 22(b) indicates
maximum allowable d is about 0.9 m, regardless of the
magnitude of wn. If the stability of the foundation ground
is not satisfied with VD installation only, it is necessary to
use another kind of stabilization and reinforcement
techniques.
In peat ground with a high water content such as
wn = 1000%, the permeability decreases significantly with
Fig. 22. Relationship between excess pore water pressure ratio um/q at the
time when the loading was completed and drain interval d; (a) qf = 50 kN/
m2 (b) qf = 100 kN/m2.
1401
Soils and Foundations 60 (2020) 1387–1404
the progress of consolidation, therefore um/q increases as
q increases (Fig. 19(b)). In such ground, the interval d of
VDs should be determined with particular care in order
to ensure stability. In the above example, d = 1.5 m is suf-
ficient for qf = 50 kN/m2 (Fig. 22(a)), but it is necessary to
reduce it to d = 0.9 m for qf = 100 kN/m2 (Fig. 22(b)).
In the test embankment project, it was initially planned
to construct a 5 m high embankment without any addi-
tional stabilitzation technique. The final load qf was 65
kN/m2 as described in 4.3.2, and the natural water content
of the peat layer (Ap) was around 500%. In this case, the
interval d of VDs should be d = 1.2 m or less in order to
perform stable embankment construction, according to
Fig. 22(a). In the test embankments, d were set to
d = 0.7, 0.9, 1.1 m. While the construction rate of the
VD-installed sections was reduced to keep a tempo with
the no-VD section that saw an imminent failure, the anal-
ysis results suggest that, even if the construction was car-
ried out at the initial construction rate, the stability of
the foundation ground might be secured.
5. Applicability of barron’s solution to vds in peat
Barron’s solution is widely used in practice, to analysis
of VD-installed peat ground. In the process of deriving
Barron’s solution, it is assumed that the coefficient of con-
solidation ch (cv) is constant, but as already mentioned, the
cv value of peat strongly depends on the consolidation
stress. Therefore, investigation is needed as to how well
Barron’s solution can reproduce the FEM analysis results
reflecting the stress-dependence of cv. The calculation
results based on Barron’s solution are shown below where
the cv values were set in the following three cases.
(1) Case1: The value corresponding to the consolidation
stress before consolidation (cv = cv(r0 v1))
(2) Case2: The value corresponding to the geometric
mean of the consolidation stress before and after con-

pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi 
solidation (cv ¼ cv r0v1  r0v2 ).
(3) Case3: The value corresponding to the consolidation
stress after consolidation (cv = cv(r0 v2)).
Here, r0 v1, r0 v2: Vertical effective stress before and after
consolidation.
Barron’s solution assumes that the load is applied
instantaneously, while the loading in the problem in this
study is ramped. The adopted method of applying Barron’s
solution to ramped loading and obtaining the consolida-
tion settlement curve is shown in Appendix D.
Fig. 23 shows the calculation results for load qf = 150-
kN/m2, drain interval d = 1.1 m, assuming construction
of a high embankment. The variation of the degree of con-
solidation U with time is shown. Fig. 23(a) shows the result
for natural water content wn = 200%. The calculation
result of Case2 using the coefficient of consolidation corre-
sponding to the geometric mean initially follows an almost
 N. Yamazoe et al.
Fig. 23. Change in degree of consolidation with time calculated with
Barron’s solution and FEM: qf = 150 kN/m2, d = 1.1 m; (a) wn = 200%,
(b) wn = 500%
same U -t relationship as that from the FEM analysis, but
soon diverges. The Case3 result shows the opposite pattern,
with the FEM results matched only towards the end of
loading. Overall, however, the difference in U arising from
constant (Barron’s solution) or variable (FEM) cv is rela-
tively minor.
Fig. 23(b) is the result of natural water content
wn = 500%. In this case, as can be seen from Fig. 18(b),
the coefficient of consolidation decreases more significantly
as the consolidation progresses, therefore either case of
Barron’s solution application cannot reproduce the FEM
analysis result as long as constant cv value is used, showing
much less agreement than with wn = 200%. Again, with the
geometric mean for the coefficient of consolidation (Case2),
only U during loading is reproduced better, while the case
of using the coefficient of consolidation after consolidation
(Case3) matched the FEM result only in the long-term.
From the results using the coefficient of consolidation cor-
responding to the consolidation pressure before consolida-
tion (Case1), it can be seen that the rate of consolidation is
quite high.
1402
Soils and Foundations 60 (2020) 1387–1404
It is usually important to grasp the following two points
in the settlement calculation of the soft ground; 1) Long-
term settlement (residual settlement) and 2) U at the time
when the construction of the structure is completed. Of
these, the latter (U) is used to evaluate the stability of the
foundation ground. This is because the increase of the
strength in the foundation ground is obtained by using
Eq. (4) and Fig. 13.
Given the above comparison with the FEM analysis
results, Barron’s solution is considered to give a reasonable
prediction in peat ground with a natural water content wn
of about 200% or less. However, Barron’s solution is less
applicable in situations where a high embankment is con-
structed (i.e. a large load/stress increase) on peat ground
with high wn of >500%. In such a case, it is effective to
use an FEM analysis as shown in this paper. When
Barron’s solution is the only available option or used for
quick estimation, attention needs to be carefully paid to
changes in the coefficient of consolidation, as follows.
The calculation of U for the stability evaluation should
uses the coefficient of consolidation of geometric mean
(Case1). For the examination of the residual settlement,
the coefficient of consolidation after consolidation (Case2)
should be used.
6. Conclusion
In this study, the long-term settlement behavior and the
stability of peat ground improved by vertical drains (VDs)
were considered with a particular focus on the significant
stress dependency of the coefficient of consolidation of
peat. Firstly, the improvement effects of VDs using
plastic-board drain were examined from a field observation
of test embankments constructed in Hokkaido, Japan. A
finite element analysis to predict the behavior of test
embankments was performed to confirm the validity of
the analysis model. A suite of parametric analyses was then
performed by changing the ground conditions of peat and
magnitude of surcharge load. By noting two key design
considerations; namely, the residual settlement and the sta-
bility right after completion of load application, the appli-
cability of Barron’s solution, which is frequently used for
vertical drain problems in practice, to peat ground was dis-
cussed. The main conclusions are as follows.
1) The coefficient of consolidation of peat strongly
depends on the consolidation stress, and decreases
significantly as the consolidation pressure increases.
Results of the parametric analysis considering this
consolidation characteristic demonstrate that, for
peat with a natural water content wn = 500% or
more, this effect becomes difficult to ignore, with sig-
nificantly larger long-term settlement in a later stage
of consolidation as the load q increases. Therefore,
interval d of VDs needs to be quite small for peat with
high water content.
 N. Yamazoe et al. Soils and Foundations 60 (2020) 1387–1404

2) The stability of the foundation ground was evaluated

by comparing um/q (excess pore water pressure um
generated during embankment construction by load
q) to its critical value (um/q)c as calculated by Eq.
(5). In the case of peat ground with a high water con-
tent, especially with a natural water content
wn = 1000%, the permeability is greatly decreases
during consolidation and the stability of the founda-
tion ground is significantly reduced. In such ground,
it is necessary to determine d while paying attention
to the rapid decrease of the coefficient of consolida-
tion, or to take additional measures of securing the
stability.
3) In peat ground with high natural water content under
Fig. A1. The bearing capacity of strip load assuming circular slip
significant consolidation pressure changes, Barron’s mechanism.
solution is less applicable, as it assumes a constant
coefficient of consolidation. When Barron’s solution
is the only option available or needs to be used for Appendix B. A method for obtaining the average value
quick estimation of consolidation behaviour, it is nec- of the excess pore water pressure um in the soil layer from
essary to change the value for the coefficient of con- the excess pore water pressure u measured by the pore
solidation to be selected according to key concerns water pressure sensor in the ground without VDs is
(residual settlement or stability during embankment described below.
construction).
Eq.(A2) is the solution of Terzaghi’s consolidation
equation (the drainage direction is vertical) and gives the
distribution of u at a certain time.
Acknowledgments
u 4X 1
¼
The data of the test embankments used in this paper q p n¼0
were provided by Hokkaido Regional Development (  2 )  
n
Bureau, Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and ð1Þ 2n þ 1 2n þ 1
 exp  p T v cos pZ
Tourism (MLIT). This work was supported by JSPS 2n þ 1 2 2
KAKENHI Grant Number JP16K06496. ðA2Þ

Appendix A. The bearing capacity against a two- Where, q: load, Z (=z/H) is a dimensionless depth, z:
dimensional strip load is calculated based on the upper depth, H: drainage distance, and Tv: the time factor (verti-
bound theorem. The undrained shear strength is su0 in the cal direction).
original ground, where as it varies to su due to the increase From the nature of the exponential function on the right
in strength beneath the loaded surface. Assuming a circular side of Eq.(A2), when the time factor becomes relatively
slip surface as shown in Fig. A1, the bearing capacity qb is large (e.g. Tv > 0.1), u/q can be approximated by a solution
obtained as follows by using the upper bound theorem. with n = 0 as shown in Eq.(A3).
 2  p 
u 4 p
External work rate Wext in Fig. A1 is,  exp  T v cos Z ðA3Þ
q p 4 2
Wext=qB (Rcosh–B/2) x
Where, x is the angular velocity. The internal dissipa-
Next, the average value of the excess pore water pressure
tion rate Wint is,
um in the soil layer is expressed as in Eq.(A4).
Wint={su R (p/2–h)+su0 R (p/2–h)} Rx
(  2 )
from Wext=Wint, um 8 X 1
1 2n þ 1
q=(su+su0) R2 (p–2h)/{B (2Rcosh–B)} ¼ 2 exp  p Tv ðA4Þ
q p n¼0 ð2n þ 1Þ2 2
from the above, extremum (qb) of q is.
from @q/@R = 0, R=B/cosh
also, from @q/@h = 0, 2(Rcosh–B/2)=(p–2h)Rsinh Similarly to Eq.(A2), um/q can be approximated by a
thus, h=23.2 °. solution with n = 0 when Tv > 0.1.
Therefore, the bearing capacity is. 2

um 8 p
 2 exp  T v ðA5Þ
qb ¼ 2:76ðsu þ su0 Þ ðA1Þ q p 4

1403
 N. Yamazoe et al. Soils and Foundations 60 (2020) 1387–1404

In Fig. 14 (a), assuming that the in-situ isochronous
curve conforms to Eq.(A3), Tv is calculated from the mea-
sured value (u/q)measured. In this study, Z = 0.3. The value
um/q in the soil layer is calculated by substituting Tv into
Eq.(A5).
Appendix C. In the ground improved by VDs, a method
for obtaining the average value of the excess pore water
pressure um in the soil layer from the excess pore water
pressure u measured by the pore water pressure sensor is
described below.
Eq.(A6) is the solution of Barron’s consolidation equa-
tion (axisymmetric condition) and expresses the distribu-
tion of u along the direction of radial r at a certain time.
   
References
u 1 8T h r r2  r2w
¼ exp  ln  ðA6Þ
q F ðnÞ F ðnÞ rw 2r2e
Where q: load, Th : time factor (horizontal direction),
re = de/2: radius of an equivalent effective circle, rw = dw/2:
radius of an equivalent circular cross section for a VD hav-
ing a rectangular cross section, and n (=re/rw). The factor F
(n) is given by the following equation.
n2 3n2  1
F ðnÞ ¼ lnn  ðA7Þ
n2  1 4n2
Next, the average value of the excess pore water pressure
um in the soil layer is expressed as in Eq.(A8).
 
um 8T h
¼ exp  ðA8Þ
q F ðnÞ
The in-situ isochronous curve can be approximated by
Eq. (A6), and Th was obtained from the measured value
(u/q)measured and r = re. This Th is substituted into Eq.
(A8), and the value of um/q in the soil layer in Fig. 14 (b)
is obtained.
Appendix D. Barron’s (or Terzaghi’s) consolidation
solution assumes that the load is loaded instantaneously.
The consolidation settlement curve for incremental loading
was obtained by shifting the consolidation settlement curve
for instantaneous loading by t0/2 (t0: period of embank-
ment construction). Specifically, the degree of consolida-
tion U was calculated by the following formula.
1) After embankment construction (t＞t0)
U ¼ U ðt  t0 =2Þ ðA9Þ
2) During embankment construction (t5t0)
The load at a certain time t is qt, and the compressive
strain et at this time is given by the following equation
using the final compressive strain etf.
et ¼ etf U ðt=2Þ ðA10Þ
Where, et and etf: compressive strain at time t and final
compressive strain due to qt, respectively. In normally con-
solidated ground, the final compressive strain is given as
follows.
etf /ef = log((pc + Drvt)/pc)/log((pc + Drvf)/pc)
Here, ef is the final compressive strain at the final load qf,
and pc is the consolidation yield stress. Here Drvt and Drvf
are vertical total stress increments generated in the ground
by qt and qf, respectively.
Therefore,
U ¼ et =ef
¼ logððpc þ Drvt Þ=pc Þ= logððpc þ Drvf Þ=pc ÞU ðt=2Þ
ðA11Þ
Barron, R.A., 1948. Consolidation of fine-grained soils by drain wells.
Trans, ASCE 113, 718–742.
Civil Engineering Research Institute for Cold Region. (2017) Manual on
countermeasures for peat ground, (inJapanese)
Hayashi, H., Mitachi, T., Nishimoto, S., 2005. Determination of Cam-clay
parameters for elasto-plastic FE analysis of peat ground. Proceedings
of the 40th Japan National Conference on Geotechnical Engineering,
pp. 857–858 (in Japanese).
Hayashi, H., Mitachi, T., Nishimoto, S., 2008. Evaluation on permeability
of peat using in-situ permeability test and oedmeter test. J. Geotech.
Eng. JSCE 64 (3), 495–504 (in Japanese).
Hayashi, H., Nishimoto, S., Murakami, Y., 2006. Improvement effect of
plastic drain method with reinforced fill using wire netting on peat.
Tech. Rep. JGS Hokkaido Branch 46, 61–66 (in Japanese).
Hayashi, H., Yamazoe, N., Mitachi, T., Tanaka, H., Nishimoto, S., 2012.
Coefficient of earth pressure at rest for normally and overconsolidated
peat ground in Hokkaido area. Soils Found. 52 (2), 299–311.
Jaky, J. (1948) Pressure in silos, Proceedings of the 2nd International
Conference on SMGE, 1, 103–109
Oikawa, H. and Ishikawa, G, 1993, Physical and chemical properties of
peat, Proceedings of symposium on problems of high organic soil,
JGS, 97–100(in Japanese)
Roscoe, K.H. and Burland, J.B. (1968)On the generalized stress-strain
behavior of ‘wet’ clay, Engineering plasticity, Cambridge University
Press, 535–609
Schmidt, B., 1966. Earth pressures at rest related to stress history. Can.
Geotech. J. 3 (4), 239–242.
Tada, S., Nishimura, S., Yamazoe, N., 2019. Experimental study on
anisotropic permeability and its stress dependence in peat. Tech. Rep.
JGS Hokkaido Branch 59, 315–320 (in Japanese).
Tanaka, H., Hayashi, H., Yamazoe, N., 2019. Reconsideration of the
settlement behavior of peat from view point of hydraulic conductivity.
Soils Found. 59 (2), 316–325.
Tavenas, F., Jean, P., Leblond, P., Leroueil, S., 1983. The permeability of
natural soft clays. Part II: Permeability characteristics. Canadian
Geotech. J. 20 (4), 645–660.
Yamazoe, N., Tanaka, H., Hayashi, H., Mitachi, T., 2011. Settlement-
time behavior of peat ground and applicability of conventional
predicting methods. Japanese Geotech. J. 6 (3), 395–414 (in Japanese).
Yamazoe, N., Tanaka, H., Nishimura, S., Hayashi, H., 2017. Coefficient
of secondary consolidation of peatsand its application to ground
improved by plastic-board drain method. Japanese Geotech. J. 12 (4),
409–424 (in Japanese).
Zienkiewicz, O.C., Scott, F.C., 1972. On the principle of repeatability and
its application in analysis of turbine and pump impellers. Int. J.
Numer. Meth. Eng. 4, 445–452.

1404