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

net/publication/269927680

Effect of deformation of prefabricated vertical drains on discharge capacity

Article  in  Geosynthetics International · December 2010

DOI: 10.1680/gein.2010.17.6.431

CITATIONS READS

21 681

3 authors, including:

Hoang-Hung Tran-Nguyen Tuncer B. Edil

Ho Chi Minh City University of Technology (HCMUT) University of Wisconsin–Madison
38 PUBLICATIONS   82 CITATIONS    355 PUBLICATIONS   6,825 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

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

Jet Grouting reinforcing excessive settlement of bridge approaching embankments in Dong Thap province, Vietnam View project

Containment Systems and Landfill Barriers View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Hoang-Hung Tran-Nguyen on 23 December 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Geosynthetics International, 2010, 17, No. 6

Effect of deformation of prefabricated vertical drains

on discharge capacity
H. H. Tran-Nguyen1 , T. B. Edil2 and J. A. Schneider3
1
Assistant Professor of Bridge and Highway Engineering, Department of Civil Engineering, Ho Chi
Minh City University of Technology, 268 Ly Thuong Kiet Street, B6 Building, District 10, Ho Chi Minh
City, Vietnam, Telephone: +84 9 1390 0663, Telefax: +84 8 3863 7002, E-mail: tnhhung@hcmut.edu.vn
or tnhhung@gmail.com
2
Professor of Geological Engineering, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University
of Wisconsin-Madison, 1415 Engineering Drive, Madison, WI 53706, USA, Telephone: +1 608 262
3225, Telefax: +1 608 890 3718, E-mail: edil@engr.wisc.edu
3
Assistant Professor of Geological Engineering, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering,
University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1415 Engineering Drive, Madison, WI 53706, USA,
Telephone: +1608 262 3491, Telefax: +1 608 890 3718, E-mail: jamess@cae.wisc.edu

Received 24 March 2010, revised 20 September 2010, accepted 20 September 2010

ABSTRACT: The effects of deformation on PVD discharge capacity remain discrepant among
investigators. This study investigates the discharge capacity behavior of deformed PVDs using a
laboratory performance test. Four different PVDs were tested, and two different soils were used for
confinement. The reduction of the discharge capacity of PVDs varied with the type of PVD and
percentage settlement, and reached up to 99% at a maximum percentage settlement of 41%.
Hydraulic gradient also appreciably affects discharge capacity, owing to the non-steady-state flow in
the core of the PVD. Soil type impacts on the deformation pattern of PVDs, but its effect on
discharge capacity appears to be slight in this study. Soil type, however, has a significant influence
on required discharge capacity. For a 20 m long drain in example calculations, one of the PVDs
would result in restriction of water flow and cause significant increases in time for consolidation.
Additionally, if soils with a higher hydraulic conductivity, such as 1 3 10
8 m/s occur at a site,
significant increases in consolidation time could occur at percentage settlements in excess of
approximately 30% for all drains tested.

KEYWORDS: Geosynthetics, Soft clays, Consolidation, Prefabricated vertical drain, PVD, Deformation,
Hydraulic gradient, Discharge capacity

REFERENCE: Tran-Nguyen, H. H., Edil, T. B. & Schneider, J. A. (2010). Effect of deformation of

prefabricated vertical drains on discharge capacity. Geosynthetics International, 17, No. 6, 431–442.
[doi: 10.1680/gein.2010.17.6.431]

effect of PVD deformation on discharge capacity. In the

1. INTRODUCTION
first, the deformation of the PVD is manually induced by
Deformation of PVDs by folding, crimping, bending, bending it to a specified shape, and discharge capacity tests
buckling or kinking resulting from large consolidation are run by placing the deformed PVD in a soil or membrane
settlements may reduce the discharge capacity signifi- for lateral confinement (i.e. index tests). In the second
cantly or totally (Kremer et al. 1983; Ali 1991; Aboshi et method, the PVD is allowed to deform naturally with
al. 2001; Bo et al. 2003; Chu et al. 2006). The amount consolidation settlement in a soil, and the discharge capa-
and nature of deformation are thought to be functions of city is measured while the deformed PVD is in the soil (i.e.
the deformational resistance of PVD, the type of PVD, the performance test). The first method imposes an artificial
compressibility of the soil, and the vertical stress applied deformation on the PVD: consequently it may not simulate
on the soil. Even though many researchers have studied general field conditions, and could under- or overestimate
the deformation of PVDs, the effects of deformation on the discharge capacity. However, it does provides rapid test
discharge capacity are still inconclusive (Holtz et al. results. The second approach is more comparable to in situ
1991; Aboshi et al. 2001; Chu et al. 2006). conditions, and thus can be considered more representative
Two methods have been widely used in investigating the of field conditions, but it is time-consuming.
1072-6349 # 2010 Thomas Telford Ltd 431
Delivered by ICEVirtualLibrary.com to:
IP: 128.104.61.52
On: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 21:47:46
432
The discharge capacity of a manually deformed PVD
varies significantly with the type of PVD and the
deformed shape. Lawrence and Koerner (1988) investi-
gated the discharge capacity of several types of PVD
under a hydraulic gradient of 1.0 using a simple kinking
device. They reported that the discharge capacity de-
creased in the range 9–72% with a single 908 wedge.
Holtz et al. (1991) showed that the discharge capacity of
PVDs under a hydraulic gradient of 1.0 with induced
sinusoidal deformation was reduced considerably at 20%
applied settlement. Chang et al. (1994) used an apparatus
similar to a triaxial test device to measure the discharge
capacity of PVDs with the induced shape of letters U or V
under a maximum confining pressure of 294 kPa. They
showed that the reduction of the discharge capacity of six
PVDs tested under hydraulic gradients of 0.46, 0.87, 1.31,
and 1.74 was between 20% and 92%. Bergado et al.
(1996) used their modified triaxial test device and investi-
gated the discharge capacity of various PVDs intensively
under many initial deformation modes. With two clamps
plus 30% bending, the discharge capacity of PVDs under
hydraulic gradients of 0.25, 0.5 and 1.0 diminished by
34% to 99%, depending on the type of PVD. Cline and
Burns (2003) used a simple device that can create a single
908 folding. They reported that the reduction of discharge
capacity of PVDs wrapped in plastic membranes under a
hydraulic gradient of 1.0 varied from 17% to 34%.
The effects of naturally deformed PVD on discharge
capacity remain discrepant, even though several investiga-
tors agree that the discharge capacity reduces significantly
when the vertical strain is larger than 15%. Sasaki (1981)
and Hansbo (1983) reported that the folding of a PVD at a
relative vertical strain of 15% in a large-scale laboratory
test had no effect on the discharge capacity. Miura et al.
(1998) reported that folding (without kinking) of PVDs
does not influence discharge capacity up to a vertical
strain of 20%. Contrary to these findings, Kremer et al.
(1982), Kremer (1983), and Oostveen (1983) indicated
that folding of PVDs due to large vertical strains severely
diminishes the discharge capacity. However, no direct
discharge capacity data were presented, except for photo-
graphs of extremely folded PVDs. Kremer (1983) found
that the discharge capacity of a PVD sample excavated
from a two-year test area was shut off. Based on this,
Kremer (1983) stated that large folding of a PVD can cut
off the discharge capacity completely, and when the
relative vertical strain is larger than 15%, the reduction of
the discharge capacity has to be taken into account.
Significant reduction of discharge capacity for vertical
consolidation strains in excess of 15% is widely reported.
Ali (1991) used a consolidation cell (0.5 m in diameter)
with a 0.5 m high kaolinite specimen to investigate the
discharge capacity of PVDs deformed naturally by con-
solidation settlement. That study found that the discharge
capacity of PVDs at a hydraulic gradient of 0.5 under a
vertical pressure of 120 kPa reduced substantially, in the
range 47–99%, under a relative compression of 30%. The
reduction varied with the stiffness of the PVD: the stiffer
the filter sleeve, the higher was the discharge capacity.
Aboshi et al. (2001) used a half consolidation cell (0.3 m
Geosynthetics International, 2010, 17, No. 6
Delivered by ICEVirtualLibrary.com to:
IP: 128.104.61.52
On: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 21:47:46
Tran-Nguyen, Edil and Schneider
inside diameter) with a PVD in the center of the cell to
test undisturbed soil samples. That study found that a
crook or kink in the PVD shut off the discharge capacity
completely. Kim et al. (2003) used a consolidation cell
(0.5 m in diameter) to investigate the discharge capacity
of a PVD under consolidation settlement. They found that
the discharge capacity of the PVD at a hydraulic gradient
of 0.50 was reduced by about 89% of its initial discharge
capacity at the end of consolidation when the PVD had
experienced a vertical load of 245 kPa, but it was unclear
how much settlement took place. Chu et al. (2006), using
a 495 mm diameter consolidation cell, investigated the
discharge capacity of a PVD embedded in a very soft soil
under a vertical pressure of 110 kPa. They reported that
the discharge capacity reduced up to 84% at a vertical
strain of 46% by the end of the consolidation stage. The
discharge capacity was measured by the constant-head
method under a hydraulic gradient of 0.5. Their PVD was
extremely bent, but not kinked, at the end of the test. In
summary, the literature indicates that a vertical strain in
excess of 20% can significantly affect PVD discharge
capacity.
To gain a better understanding of the effects of
deformation on PVD discharge capacity, this study fo-
cused on:
1. developing a consolidation cell apparatus (the PVD-S
apparatus), and employing it to generate natural
deformation of PVDs embedded in soil, simulating
the in situ conditions as closely as possible;
2. measuring the discharge capacity of such deformed
PVDs directly using the PVD-S apparatus under
different hydraulic gradients; and
3. investigating the controlling factors that may affect
discharge capacity, such as hydraulic gradient,
percentage consolidation settlement, flexural stiffness
of the PVD, and soil type.
2. TEST PROGRAM
2.1. Test apparatus
The PVD-S apparatus, which is an aluminum cylinder of
0.32 m inside diameter and 0.75 m high, was used to
simulate the consolidation process of soft soils with a
prefabricated vertical drain (PVD) at the center of the
cylinder (Figure 1). The PVD-S allows a maximum
percentage settlement of 41%, which is a typical value in
very soft soils, inducing significant deformations in the
PVD. The discharge capacity of the PVD can be measured
intermittently throughout the test by circulating water
through it by means of two reservoirs fitted to its two
ends. A set of six piezometers are arranged in different
radial directions from the center, located at a distance of
0.2 m from the bottom, to measure pore water pressure
(PWP) during consolidation (Figure 1b). Combined with
the settlement data, this allows verification of the progress
of primary consolidation.
The primary objective of the PVD-S device is to
investigate the reduction of the discharge capacity of a
Effect of deformation of prefabricated vertical drains on discharge capacity 433
Pneumatic air
cylinders

LVDT for vertical

displacement

Movable top
piston, δ ⫽ 127 mm

Top reservoir

Travel length of
the piston
325
P6
P5 P4

PVD 100 ⫻ (4⫺6) mm

P3
P2
P1

750
Soil specimen
PVD

425
200

320

(b)

Bottom
reservoir

320

(a)

Figure 1. Features of the PVD-S apparatus (a) main dimensions of PVD-S apparatus (mm); (b) arrangement of piezometers

PVD that deforms naturally with progressing consolidation
settlement. This is considered a performance test, because
the PVD is tested in contact and interacting with the
surrounding soil, as opposed to an index test, in which the
deformed PVD would be tested directly, without soil
confinement. The PVD-S apparatus is designed to force
predominantly radial flow rather than vertical flow. Water
is squeezed out of the soil specimen only through the PVD
installed in the center of the cylinder. Water in the soil
mass travels only in the radial direction, reaches the PVD,
and drains out vertically into the top and bottom reser-
voirs. Rubber membranes are placed at the top and bottom
to prevent water draining in the vertical directions. The
volume of water drained can be measured for comparison
with the settlement.
2.2. Test procedure
The mandrel, which is a rectangular metal box with cross-
section of 120 mm 3 15 mm and 900 mm long, holding a
PVD inside, was placed in the center of the cylinder
before placing the soil in the cylinder. The mandrel
prevents both the PVD from deforming and the soil
specimen from consolidating in the radial direction during
placement of the soil. The soil was placed in the cylinder
Geosynthetics International, 2010, 17, No. 6
in layers up to a height of 700–720 mm, and agitated by a
vibrator to remove any air trapped during filling. One end
of the PVD was terminated in the bottom reservoir, whose
valves are closed during soil placement. The mandrel was
withdrawn after placing the soil, followed by the loading
piston. The top end of the PVD terminated in the top
reservoir, attached at the center of the loading piston. A
set of six piezometers was installed on the side wall.
Approximately 1 h passed before the top part of the cell
was assembled, during which time it was observed that the
gap created by the withdrawal of the mandrel was filled
with the soft soil. A discharge capacity test using the
constant-head method in the PVD was carried out imme-
diately after assembling the top part of the cell. A nominal
pressure of 12.5 kPa was applied to keep the piston from
uplifting during the discharge test. These discharge capa-
city data are considered to correspond to the discharge
capacity of a straight PVD. The initial discharge capacity
test was performed under hydraulic gradients of 0.10,
0.25, 0.50, 0.75 and 1.0 by circulating water from the
bottom reservoir to the top reservoir. Different hydraulic
gradients were used to observe whether the flow through
the PVD was non-laminar or laminar. The different
hydraulic gradients were generated by adjusting the eleva-

Delivered by ICEVirtualLibrary.com to:

IP: 128.104.61.52
On: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 21:47:46
434 Tran-Nguyen, Edil and Schneider

tions of the two reservoirs. The hydraulic gradient is
calculated by dividing the head difference by the em-
bedded length of the PVD in the soil specimen. When the
soil reached the end of primary consolidation, based on
the settlement and PWP data collected from the piezo-
meters, a discharge capacity test was conducted again
under various hydraulic gradients. The experiment was
continued in this manner, with incremental increases of
the vertical pressure to 25 kPa, 50 kPa, 100 kPa, 200 kPa
and 400 or 490 kPa. The discharge capacity test was
conducted at the end of each consolidation stage. Water
was circulated along the core of the PVD to wash fine
particles infiltrated into the PVD core during the consoli-
dation stage. Therefore the discharge measured from this
study is free of siltation effects. Each discharge capacity
measurement took about 60 min. Duration of consolida-
tion was 5–14 days for each loading increment, depending
on soil type. The total time to complete the test was 4–5
weeks.
Chu et al. (2004) reported a large reduction (,60%) in
discharge capacity over 4 weeks. Time effects were not
part of the scope of this study; however, creep effects are
considered to be negligible relative to the deformations
induced in the PVD (Miura and Chai 2000). The discharge
capacities of most PVDs are affected by lateral pressures
of 150 kPa or more (Rixner et al. 1986). For this study,
the lateral pressure generated from the vertical pressure
was estimated to be less than 150 kPa, except for the last
loading increment, with a maximum pressure of 490 kPa.
Thus it is expected that the discharge measured in this
study was slightly affected by lateral pressure. The tests
were performed at room temperature (i.e. 22–248C).
2.3. Test materials
Two soils were used: Hydrite R Kaolinite (a low-plasticity
clay) and Craney Island dredgings (a high-plasticity clay).
Hydrite R Kaolinite is commercial kaolin in powder form,
and was prepared as slurry at an approximate water
content of 90%, which is almost twice its liquid limit.
Craney Island dredgings were sampled in Craney Island,
Virginia, from an island of stored dredgings. PVD per-
formance in Craney Island dredgings was described in
detail by Stark et al. (1999). The testing described in Stark
et al. (1999) was performed in the south-central portion of
the north containment area, whereas the tests in this study
used a slightly different material. The Craney Island
samples studied in this test series were collected from the
upper meter of sediment from the southwest corner of the
south containment area. A single homogenized sample
was prepared by mixing seven buckets of the soil samples.
The compositional properties of the soils are given in
Table 1. The properties of the soil specimens prepared for
the tests in their initial condition, and measured after the
tests, are summarized in Table 2. Four types of widely
used PVDs covering a range of construction were tested
(four with Hydrite R Kaolin and one with Craney Island).
The properties of the PVDs are shown in Table 3.

Table 1. Properties of the soils

Soil % Finer Clay fraction Liquid Plasticity Specific pH a Specific cv b ky c (m/s) Friction
(sieve no. , 2 ìm (%) limit (%) index (%) gravity surface areaa (m2 /s angle,
9
200) (m2 /g) (m2 /yr)) (degrees)

Kaolinite 100 80 49 25 2.59 4.2–4.5 10 6 3 10
8 1.6 3 10
9 25

(1.89)
Craney 80 73 80 55–60 2.71 NA NA 4 3 10
9 4.8 3 10
10 30
Island (0.13)

a
From manufacturer.
b
Normally consolidated coefficient of consolidation.
c
Mean hydraulic conductivity for tests performed. k decreases with void ratio e (or applied effective stress), and is approximated as k ¼ 7 3
10
10 m/s for Kaolinite and k ¼ 1.5 3 10
10 m/s for Craney Island clay.

Table 2. Physical properties of the soils in the tests

Stage Confining PVD Water content Void ratio Degree of Unit weight Dry unit weight
medium (%) saturation (%) (kN/m3 ) (kN/m3 )

Initial Kaolinite A 86.5 2.24 100 14.6 7.8

B 90.0 2.33 100 14.5 7.6
C 90.5 2.34 100 14.5 7.6
D 87.0 2.22 100 14.8 7.9
Craney Island B 92.0 2.56 98 14.4 7.5
Final Kaolinite A 40.0 1.04 100 17.5 12.5
B 38.6 1.00 100 17.6 12.7
C 38.2 0.99 100 17.7 12.8
D 38.5 1.01 100 17.6 12.7
Craney Island B 38.8 1.05 100 18.0 12.9

Geosynthetics International, 2010, 17, No. 6

Delivered by ICEVirtualLibrary.com to:

IP: 128.104.61.52
On: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 21:47:46
Effect of deformation of prefabricated vertical drains on discharge capacity 435

Table 3. Properties of the PVDs tested (from manufacturers, except flexural stiffness)

PVD

A B C D

Dimensions Thickness (mm) 3.6 3.2 5 5.5

Width (mm) 100 100 98 96
Filter sleeve AOS (O95 ) (ìm) 140 180 , 75 , 75
Permittivity (s
1 ) 0.5 0.7 1.7 NA
k (m/s) NA 3 3 10–4 1.5 3 10–3 1.5 3 10–3
Core Material PP PP PP PE
Shape Continuous channel Grooved Monofilament Studded
Flexural stiffness ASTM D1388 (ìJ/m) 74 40 34 5
Discharge capacity Straight (m3 /s) 111 3 10
6a) 100 3 10
6(b) 90 3 10
6(c) . 2.4 3 10
6(d)
Kinked at 350 kPa (m3 /s) NA NA 80 3 10
6 . 2.4 3 10
6

a
At 241 kPa.
b
Not mentioned.
c
At 350 kPa.
d
At 750 kPa, i ¼ 0.1.
NA: not available.

3. FACTORS WITH POTENTIAL
EFFECTS ON DISCHARGE CAPACITY
3.1. Hydraulic gradient
Discharge capacity, qw , is defined as the volume of water
per unit time that can conduct along the core of a PVD in
the axial direction under a unit hydraulic gradient (Hansbo
1983). It is given by
Q tween 0.1 and 1) has a large influence on the discharge
qw ¼
i
where Q is the discharge volume of water along the PVD
per unit time (m3 /s), and i is the hydraulic gradient.
Assuming that Darcy’s law is valid, qw should be constant
with hydraulic gradient.
Bo et al. (2003) indicated, based on several research
reports, that hydraulic gradient i can affect discharge
capacity measurement, and should be measured at its in
situ value. However, it is difficult to estimate the in situ
value of i in the PVD. Bo et al. recommended that a
hydraulic gradient of 0.50 should be used for discharge
capacity measurements. By contrast, Holtz et al. (1991)
concluded that the hydraulic gradient does not substan-
tially affect the discharge capacity. To check these differ-
ent interpretations, hydraulic gradients were varied from
0.1 to 1 when measuring discharge capacity, as shown in
Figure 2. The discharge capacity decreases with increasing
hydraulic gradient. Therefore the flow in the core of the
PVD is not laminar, even at small hydraulic gradients.
Non-laminar flow and air bubbles affect the discharge
capacity of the PVD.
The small hydraulic diameter of the channels within
each PVD, and the relatively high flow rates, result in
high Reynolds numbers, and thus non-laminar flow. As
the hydraulic gradient reduces, the Reynolds number
decreases, but the conditions are still turbulent. Figure 3
shows the discharge capacity normalized to the discharge
capacity at a hydraulic gradient of unity as a function of
soil type, drain type, and deformation of the drain. It may
Geosynthetics International, 2010, 17, No. 6
be inferred from Figure 3 that the discharge capacity at
low gradients may be underpredicted by a factor of 1.5 to
2.5, if it is based on a unit hydraulic gradient. Although
not tested in this study, it can also be inferred that
discharge capacities at gradients greater than unity may be
overpredicted. While the use of a hydraulic gradient of
0.5 (e.g. Bo et al. 2003) tends to minimize errors, it
should be acknowledged that the hydraulic gradient (be-
(1) capacity.
3.2. Percentage settlement
The discharge capacity of the four PVDs tested using a
hydraulic gradient of 0.1 is shown in Figure 4 as a
function of percentage settlement v , defined as
Vertical settlement
v ¼ 3 100% (2)
Inital height of soil specimen
Tests on PVD B were performed in both Kaolin and
Craney Island dredgings. All PVDs initially had similar
discharge capacities, at approximately 120 3 10
6 m3 /s.
PVDs A, B and C had a relatively linear decrease in
discharge capacity with increasing percentage settlement,
but PVD D had a much more rapid drop in discharge
capacity for initial strains up to 10%.
Figure 5 shows the degree of discharge capacity reduc-
tion as a function of percentage settlement for a hydraulic
gradient of 0.1. Results are similar for other hydraulic
gradients tested. The degree of discharge capacity reduc-
tion, Rq , in percent is defined as
 qw,v >0 
Rq ¼ 1
3 100% (3)
qw,v ¼0
where qw,v ¼0 is the initial discharge capacity, that is, at a
percentage settlement of 0, and qw,v >0 is the discharge
capacity at any other percentage settlement. In agreement
with previous studies, significant levels of reduction in
discharge capacity are observed. All PVDs, except PVD
A, showed a reduction in discharge capacity of 90–99.5%

Delivered by ICEVirtualLibrary.com to:

IP: 128.104.61.52
On: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 21:47:46
436 Tran-Nguyen, Edil and Schneider
140 140
εv ⫽ 0% εv ⫽ 0%
120

Discharge capacity, qw (m3/s) (⫻10⫺6)

Discharge capacity, qw (m3/s) (⫻10⫺6)
120 εv ⫽ 30% εv ⫽ 29%

100 εv ⫽ 39.1%
εv ⫽ 41.3%
100

80
80
60

60
40

40
20

20 0
0.1 1 0.1 1
Hydraulic gradient, i Hydraulic gradient, i
(a) (b)

140 140
εv ⫽ 0%
εv ⫽ 0%
120 εv ⫽ 29.3%
Discharge capacity, qw (m3/s) (⫻10⫺6)

120

Discharge capacity, qw (m3/s) (⫻10⫺6)

εv ⫽ 22.1%
εv ⫽ 38.2% εv ⫽ 32.6%
100 100

80 80

60 60

40 40

20 20

0 0
0.1 1 0.1 1
Hydraulic gradient, i Hydraulic gradient, i
(c) (d)

140
εv ⫽ 0%
120 εv ⫽ 25.6%
Discharge capacity, qw (m3/s) (⫻10⫺6)

εv ⫽ 40.4%
100

80

60

40

20

0
0.1 1
Hydraulic gradient, i
(e)

Figure 2. Discharge capacity of the four PVDs tested as a function of hydraulic gradient and percentage settlement: (a) PVD A,
Kaolinite; (b) PVD B, Kaolinite; (c) PVD C, Kaolinite; (d) PVD D, Kaolinite; (e) PVD B, Craney Island

at a percentage settlement of approximately 40%. PVD A ered as essentially a complete cut-off of discharge capa-
had much better performance, but still had a reduction in city, although the actual flow rates through the drain and
discharge capacity of 70% at a percentage settlement of the flow rates through the soil will be compared later to
40%. For the cases of PVD D in Kaolinite and PVD B in assess drain performance. The behavior observed in
Craney Island dredgings, reductions in discharge capacity Figures 4 and 5 with respect to different types of PVDs,
of greater than 98% were observed. This could be consid- although not shown, were similar at other gradients.
Geosynthetics International, 2010, 17, No. 6

Delivered by ICEVirtualLibrary.com to:

IP: 128.104.61.52
On: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 21:47:46
Effect of deformation of prefabricated vertical drains on discharge capacity 437
3.0 3.0

PVD A, Kaolinite

Normalized discharge capacity, qw,i /qw,1

Normalized discharge capacity, qw,i /qw,1
PVD B, Kaolinite

2.5 2.5

2.0 2.0

1.5 1.5

1.0 1.0
0.1 1 0.1 1
Hydraulic gradient, i Hydraulic gradient, i
(a) (b)

3.0 3.0
Normalized discharge capacity, qw,i /qw,1

Normalized discharge capacity, qw,i /qw,1

PVD C, Kaolinite PVD D, Kaolinite
2.5 2.5

2.0 2.0

1.5 1.5

1.0 1.0
0.1 1 0.1 1
Hydraulic gradient, i Hydraulic gradient, i
(c) (d)

3.0
Normalized discharge capacity, qw,i /qw,1

PVD B, Craney Island

2.5

2.0

1.5

1.0
0.1 1
Hydraulic gradient, i
(e)

Figure 3. Normalized discharge capacity of the four PVDs tested against hydraulic gradient (data at each hydraulic gradient
are for all percentage settlements: (a) PVD A, Kaolinite; (b) PVD B, Kaolinite; (c) PVD C, Kaolinite; (d) PVD D, Kaolinite;
(e) PVD B, Craney Island. At each gradient the data points indicate reduction in normalized discharge capacity with increasing
percentage settlement

3.3. PVD structure and flexural stiffness adapting ASTM standard D1388 for measuring the flexur-
The discharge capacity behavior of different PVDs is al stiffness of geosynthetics. ASTM D1388 involves meas-
believed to be dictated by their flexural stiffness and the uring the amount of bending under self-weight and the
structure of their cores at the same consolidation condi- mass per unit area. PVD A and D have the highest and
tion. The flexural stiffness of the PVDs was measured by lowest flexural rigidity, respectively, as shown in Table 3.
Geosynthetics International, 2010, 17, No. 6

Delivered by ICEVirtualLibrary.com to:

IP: 128.104.61.52
On: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 21:47:46
438 Tran-Nguyen, Edil and Schneider
140
PVD A, Kaolinite core of PVD C, in which monofilaments are arranged in a
PVD B, Kaolinite 3D layout, creating individual channels, appears to provide
120
PVD C, Kaolinite a large space for water flow. Water can also travel between
Discharge capacity, qw (m3/s)(⫻10⫺6)

PVD D, Kaolinite
channels, unlike the continuous or grooved channels.
100 PVD B, Craney Island
However, the monofilament is not as stiff as the contin-
uous or grooved channel to prevent the filter sleeve
80
squeezing into the drainage channel. The studded core of
PVD D can provide a punching effect on the filter sleeve,
60
owing to the high stress concentration at the corners of the
sharp studs (Ali 1991), and consequently the filter sleeve
40
can easily intrude into the drainage channels to diminish
the area for water flow. Miura and Chai (2000) and Chai
20
et al. (2004) studied the long-term qw of PVDs in a clay
confinement. They carefully measured the hydraulic prop-
0
0 10 20 30 40 50
erties of the individual drainage channels in the cross-
Percentage settlement, εv (%) section of the PVDs they tested. They concluded that the
discharge capacity is reduced less with a PVD having a
Figure 4. Discharge capacity of the four PVDs tested under a larger drainage channel and a larger hydraulic diameter.
hydraulic gradient of 0.1 as a function of percentage Rq of the PVDs tested in this study is consistent with these
settlement reports, as it decreased gradually from PVD A, B, C to D.

3.4. Deformation patterns of PVDs

100 Figure 6 shows photographs of the deformed PVDs after
completion of the tests. The PVDs were highly deformed
Degree of reduction of discharge capacity, Rq (%)

after 32–40% settlement (at the end of the tests), although

80
60
40
20
0
0 10
Percentage settlement, εv (%)
Figure 5. Degree of reduction of discharge capacity under a
hydraulic gradient of 0.1 as a function of percentage
settlement
Correspondingly, the Rq of PVD A is the lowest and the
Rq of PVD D is the highest at comparable percentage
settlement. These results agree well with the findings of
Ali (1991), Bergado et al. (1996), Chai et al. (2004) and
Miura and Chai (2000), that the more flexible the core of
the PVD, the greater the reduction in qw . A stiffer PVD
can tolerate high deformation of the surrounding soil
while maintaining sufficient continuous flow channels in
its core.
If the core structure of a PVD provides more space for
water flow, it will have a higher discharge capacity. PVD
A with continuous channels and PVD B with a grooved
core prevent the filter sleeve from intruding easily into the
core, and thus provide and maintain available spaces for
water flow during consolidation. The 3D monofilament
the deformation modes vary among the PVDs. Many kinks
and crimps can be seen, and are more significant for PVD
C and D. These kinks are believed to be the main
obstruction to flow, and cause a large reduction of the
discharge capacity. All PVDs were tested under the same
model configuration, but displayed different deformed
shapes, reflecting their construction.
PVD A, Kaolinite 3.5. Soil type
PVD B, Kaolinite
PVD C, Kaolinite
To assess the dependence of the reduction in discharge
PVD D, Kaolinite
capacity on soil type, the discharge capacity of PVD B
PVD B, Craney Island was tested in two soils: Kaolinite and Craney Island
dredgings. Figure 7a shows the degree of discharge
20 30 40 50
capacity reduction varying with percentage settlement, and
Figure 7b shows the reduction in normalized discharge
capacity with increasing percentage settlement. Both
figures show data for a hydraulic gradient of 0.1. Similar
conclusions are drawn for other hydraulic gradients tested.
When compared with the percentage settlement, the
discharge capacity and reduction in discharge capacity are
quite similar for both soils types using PVD B. This is
surprising, in view of the differences in deformation
patterns observed in Figure 6b and 6c. To reach the
maximum percentage settlement of approximately 40%,
the Kaolinite specimen was loaded to 400 kPa and the
Craney Island dredgings to 490 kPa, indicating similar
compression characteristics. Both soils had an initial void
ratio near 2.4 (Table 3), and both have a clay fraction
close to 75%. The largest difference in material behavior
is the friction angle of the soils, which evidently had little
effect on the relationship between settlement and reduction
in PVD discharge capacity. Additional soils with a wider
range of grain sizes and compression characteristics need
to be tested to assess the influence of soil type on
reduction in discharge capacity.
Geosynthetics International, 2010, 17, No. 6

Delivered by ICEVirtualLibrary.com to:

IP: 128.104.61.52
On: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 21:47:46
Effect of deformation of prefabricated vertical drains on discharge capacity 439
140

120 PVD B, Kaolinite

Discharge capacity, qw (m3/s) (⫻10⫺6)

PVD B, Craney Island
100

(a) 80

60

40

(b) 20

0
0 10 20 30 40 50
Percentage settlement, εv (%)
(a)

(c) 100
B, Kaolinite

Degree of reduction of discharge capacity, Rq (%)

B, Craney Island
80

(d)

60

40

20

(e) 0
0 10 20 30 40 50
Figure 6. Deformation patterns of the four PVDs tested at Percentage settlement, εv (%)
(b)
the termination of the tests (no scale): (a) PVD A, Kaolinite;
(b) PVD B, Kaolinite; (c) PVD B, Craney Island; (d) PVD C, Figure 7. (a) Discharge capacity of PVD B in Kaolinite and
Kaolinite; (e) PVD D, Kaolinite Craney Island dredgings as a function of percentage
settlement; (b) degree of discharge capacity reduction as a
function of percentage settlement

Although the mechanical properties of Craney Island

dredgings and Kaolinite were quite similar in these tests,
the water flow characteristics were significantly different.
Craney Island dredgings required 37 days to reach a
settlement of 40%, whereas Kaolinite required only 21
days. Therefore the average volume of water flowing into
the PVD from Craney Island dredgings during consolida-
tion occurred at a rate approximately half that of Kaoli-
nite. The required discharge capacity of a drain in Craney
Island dredgings would therefore be less than that required
for Kaolinite, leading to lower well resistance: this is
addressed in the next section.
consolidation will increase, owing to well resistance. Well
resistance is typically characterized as a function of kh /qw ,
the ratio of the horizontal hydraulic conductivity of the
soil to the discharge capacity of the drain (divided by the
square of the discharge length of the drain) (e.g. Holtz et
al. 1991). The time, t, for consolidation is quantified
according to
Th D2e
t¼ (4)
ch

where Th is a dimensionless time factor, ch is the

4. REQUIRED DISCHARGE CAPACITY
horizontal coefficient of consolidation of the soil [k/
The discharge capacity of a PVD should have a minimum (ªw mv )], and De is the equivalent diameter of the influence
value that is much larger than the discharge rate of water zone (i.e. 1.05 times the PVD spacing for a triangular
in the soil mass surrounding it, in the influence zone installation pattern). The degree of consolidation, U, is
towards the PVD. As the discharge capacity of the drain related to the normalized time factor (e.g. Holtz et al.
becomes close to that of the surrounding soil, the time for 1991):
Geosynthetics International, 2010, 17, No. 6

Delivered by ICEVirtualLibrary.com to:

IP: 128.104.61.52
On: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 21:47:46
440 Tran-Nguyen, Edil and Schneider
3.0
ln ð1
U Þ F ð nÞ
Th ¼ (5a)

8
2.5
ln ð1
U Þ Fw ð nÞ
Th,w ¼ (5b)

8
2.0
where F(n) is a factor accounting for the well spacing, and

Th,w /Th
Fw (n) adds the influence of well resistance in that expres- 1.5
sion. The influence of a smear zone is not addressed in
this paper, because of the way experiments were per-
1.0
formed; however, one can expect that the addition of a PVD A, Kaolinite
smear zone would result in an even lower required PVD B, Kaolinite
PVD C, Kaolinite
discharge capacity than these results indicate. The general 0.5 PVD D, Kaolinite
expression for F(n) was presented by Barron (1948) as PVD B, Craney Island
Example
n2 3n2
1 0
F ð nÞ ¼ ln ð nÞ
1 10 100 1000 104
n2
1 4n2 Available discharge capacity, qw (m3/yr)
(6a) (a)
3
 ln ð nÞ

4 3.0
PVD A, Kaolinite
The addition of well resistance to Equation 6a results in PVD B, Kaolinite
2.5 PVD C, Kaolinite
the expression (e.g. Hansbo 1981)
    PVD D, Kaolinite
3 kh PVD B, Craney Island
Fw ð nÞ  ln ð nÞ
þ zð2LDR
zÞ (6b) 2.0
Example
4 qw Th,w /Th

1.5
where LDR is the drainage length for the well, and z is the
depth of a layer. To assess the average degree of
1.0
consolidation across an entire drain, Fw (n) is expressed as
   
3 2 2 k h 0.5
Fw ð nÞ  ln ð nÞ
þ L (6c)
4 3 DR qw
0
The influence of well resistance increases as the 0 10 20 30 40 50
Percentage settlement, εv (%)
discharge capacity decreases, and quantification of the (b)
influence of Fw (n) can be addressed using the ratio of
Equation 5b using Fw (n) (Equation 6c) and Equation 5a Figure 8. Increase in time for consolidation (Th,w /Th ) due to
using F(n) (Equation 6a) to give well resistance for a 20 m drainage length PVD with 1 m
spacing in a triangular pattern at a hydraulic gradient of 0.1:
Th,w ln ð1
U Þ Fw ð nÞ
8 (a) as a function of available discharge capacity; (b) as a
¼ 
Th
8 ln ð1
U Þ F ð nÞ function of settlement: Example calculation used k 1 3

(7) 1028 m/s with discharge capacity based on PVD B in Craney
Fw ð nÞ ð2=3ÞL2DR k h =qw Island soil; others used the experimentally measured values
¼ ¼1þ for each soil and PVD
F ð nÞ ln ð nÞ
3=4

Figure 8a gives the ratio of the time factors (Th,w /Th ) as

a measure of the delay in consolidation time due to well
resistance, as a function of the available discharge capa-
city and hydraulic conductivity measured in the five tests
in this study, as well as an example with a particularly
higher hydraulic conductivity (1 3 10
8 m/s) but the same
discharge performance of PVD B in Craney Island dred-
gings. A hypothetical drainage length of 20 m is used
together with a spacing of 1 m in a triangular pattern in
all cases. These values represent realistic and more critical
field conditions for well resistance. Significant increases
in time for consolidation are observed in some cases for
qw less than 100 m3 /yr. The example with high hydraulic
conductivity soil indicates that the normalized time for
consolidation could be as high as 2.6 times. These
analyses are in agreement with previous studies, which
Geosynthetics International, 2010, 17, No. 6
suggest that the required discharge capacity should be
greater than 100 to 150 m3 /yr (3.2 3 10
6 to 4.8 3
10
6 m3 /s) to maintain acceptable performance (Rixner et
al. 1986; Holtz 1989; Holtz et al. 1991; Chang et al.
1994; Bo et al. 2003; Chu et al. 2004).
The data are also plotted in Figure 8b as the increase in
normalized consolidation time due to well resistance
against percentage settlement. Although significant reduc-
tions in discharge capacity are measured, there is a
minimal increase in time for consolidation for all cases
except PVD D. This is due largely to the low hydraulic
conductivity in Kaolinite and Craney Island dredgings. If
the reduction in discharge capacity for Craney Island
dredgings is compared with a soil with a hydraulic
conductivity of 1 3 10
8 m/s as in the example, signifi-

Delivered by ICEVirtualLibrary.com to:

IP: 128.104.61.52
On: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 21:47:46
Effect of deformation of prefabricated vertical drains on discharge capacity
cant increases in consolidation times due to well resistance
are calculated for percentage settlements in excess of
30%. The relationships between discharge capacity, soil
hydraulic conductivity, drain geometry and spacing, and
increases in consolidation time due to well resistance are
specific for a given set of parameters: therefore site-
specific performance testing, such as that in the PVD-S
device, is recommended.
5. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
A prefabricated vertical drain-soil (PVD-S) device was
developed and used to simulate the consolidation process
of a soft cylindrical element of soil with a PVD at its
center. Five experiments were conducted, four using
Kaolinite and one using Craney Island dredgings as the
confining soil, with four types of PVD. The following
conclusions are put forward, based on the experimental
results.
1. The discharge capacity for design cannot be based
on the discharge capacity of a straight PVD alone for
sites where large settlement is expected.
2. The discharge capacity is dependent on hydraulic
gradient, as a result of non-laminar flow occurring
during the discharge capacity measurements. The
effects of non-laminar flow were observed in all
tests performed using hydraulic gradients between
0.1 and 1.
3. Soil and drain type strongly control the deformation
patterns of PVDs during consolidation, but minimal
effects on discharge capacity were observed.
4. The required discharge capacity is strongly depen-
dent on soil type, and proportional to the horizontal
coefficient of consolidation and the amount of
settlement for a given load.
Previous recommendations of a required discharge
capacity of 100 m3 /yr are considered appropriate for the
soils and drains tested in this study. However, this is not a
general recommendation, and it should be updated based
on soil conditions and drain type, as well as drain
geometry and installation pattern, preferably based on the
results of performance testing.
NOTATIONS
Basic SI units are given in parentheses.
cv vertical coefficient of consolidation (m2 /s)
ch horizontal coefficient of consolidation
(m2 /s)
De PVD influence zone (m)
dw PVD equivalent diameter (m)
F(n) factor accounting for well spacing without
well resistance (dimensionless)
Fw (n) factor accounting for well spacing with
well resistance (dimensionless)
i hydraulic gradient (dimensionless)
k hydraulic conductivity (m/s)
Geosynthetics International, 2010, 17, No. 6
Delivered by ICEVirtualLibrary.com to:
IP: 128.104.61.52
On: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 21:47:46
441
kh horizontal hydraulic conductivity (m/s)
LDR PVD length (m)
mv coefficient of volume compressibility
(m2 /N)
n ¼ De /dw factor (dimensionless)
Q discharge volume of water (m3 /s)
qw PVD discharge capacity (m3 /s)
qw1 PVD discharge capacity under a hydraulic
gradient of 1 (m3 /s)
qw i PVD discharge capacity under any
hydraulic gradient less than 1 (m3 /s)
qw,v .0 PVD discharge capacity at v . 0
(m3 /s)
qw,v ¼0 PVD discharge capacity at v ¼ 0 (m3 /s)
Rq degree of reduction of discharge capacity
(dimensionless)
S PVD spacing (m)
Th horizontal time factor without well
resistance (dimensionless)
Th,w horizontal time factor with well resistance
(dimensionless)
t time (s)
U degree of consolidation (dimensionless)
z depth of a layer (m)
ªw unit weight of water (N/m3 )
v percentage settlement (dimensionless)

soil internal friction angle (degrees)
REFERENCES
Aboshi, H., Sutoh, Y., Inoue, T. & Shimizu, Y. (2001). Kinking
deformation of PVD under consolidation settlement of surrounding
clay. Soils and Foundations, 41, No. 5, 25–32.
Ali, F. H. (1991). The flow behavior of deformed prefabricated vertical
drains. Geotextiles and Geomembranes, 10, No. 3, 235–248.
Barron, R. A. (1948). Consolidation of fine-drained soils by drain wells.
Transactions of American Society of Civil Engineers, 113, No.
2346, 718–754.
Bergado, D. T., Manivannan, R. & Balasubramaniam, A. S. (1996).
Proposed criteria for discharge capacity of prefabricated vertical
drains. Geotextiles and Geomembranes, 14, No. 9, 481–505.
Bo, M. W., Chu, J. & Choa, V. (2003). Soil Improvement: Prefabricated
Vertical Drain Techniques, Thompson, Singapore.
Chai, J.-C., Miura, N. & Nomura, T. (2004). Effect of hydraulic radius on
long-term drainage capacity of geosynthetics drains. Geotextiles
and Geomembranes, 22, No. 1–2, 3–16.
Chang, D. T. T, Liao, J. C. & Lai, S. P. (1994). Laboratory study of
vertical drains for a ground improvement project in Taipei.
Proceeding of the 5th International Conference on Geotextiles,
Geomembranes and Related Products, Singapore, September 1994,
Vol. 2, pp. 807–812.
Chu, J., Bo, M. W. & Choa, V. (2004). Practical considerations for using
vertical drains in soil improvement projects. Geotextiles and
Geomembranes, 22, No. 1–2, 101–117.
Chu, J., Bo, M. W. & Choa, V. (2006). Improvement of ultra-soft soil
using prefabricated vertical drains. Geotextiles and Geomembranes,
24, No. 6, 339–348.
Cline, M. J. & Burns, S. E. (2003). Evaluation of Wick Drain
Performance in Virginia Soils, Virginia Department of Transporta-
tion, Federal Highway Administration, Washington, DC, USA.
Hansbo, S. (1981). Consolidation of fine-grained soil by prefabricated
drains. Proceedings of the 10th European Conference on Soil
Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Stockholm, Sweden, 1981,
Vol. 3, pp. 677–682.
Hansbo, S. (1983). How to evaluate the properties of prefabricated drains.
 442 Tran-Nguyen, Edil and Schneider

Proceedings of the 8th European Conference on Soil Mechanics
and Foundation Engineering: Improvement of Ground, Balkema,
Rotterdam, The Netherlands, Vol. 2, pp. 621–626.
Holtz, R. D. (1989). Behavior of bent prefabricated vertical drains.
Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Soil Mech-
anics and Foundation Engineering, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, Vol. 3,
pp. 1657–1660.
Holtz, R. D., Jamiolkowski, M. B., Lancellotta, R. & Pedroni, R.
(1991). Prefabricated Vertical Drains: Design and Performance,
CIRIA Ground Engineering Report, Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd,
London.
Kim, S. S., Shin, H. Y., Han, S. J. & Kim, B. I. (2003). The estimation of
discharge capacity for vertical drain materials using composite
discharge capacity apparatus. Proceedings of the 13th International
Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference, Honolulu, Hawaii,
USA, May 2003, pp. 568–572.
Kremer, R., De Jager, W., Maagdenberg, A., Meyvogel, I. & Oostveen, J.
(1982). Quality standards for vertical drains. Proceedings of the 2nd
International conference on Geotextiles, Las Vegas, USA, August
1982, Vol. 2, pp. 319–324.
Kremer, R. (1983). Discussion to specialty session 6. Proceedings of the
8th European Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation
Engineering, Helsinki, Finland, May 1983, Vol. 3, pp. 1235–1237.
Kremer, R. H. J., Oostveen, J. P., van Weele, A. F., De Jager, W. F. J. &
Meyvogel, I. J. (1983). Quality of vertical drainage. Proceedings of
the 8th European Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation
Engineering: Improvement of Ground, Helsinki, Finland, May 1983,
Vol. 2, pp. 721–726.
Lawrence, C. A. & Koerner, R. M. (1988). Flow behavior of kinked strip
drains. Proceedings of the Symposium on Geosynthetics for Soil
Improvement, Nashville, TN, USA, May 1988, ASCE Geotechnical
Special Publication No. 18, pp. 22–35.
Miura, N., Chai, J. C. & Toyota, K. (1998). Investigation on some factors
affecting discharge capacity of prefabricated vertical drain.
Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Geosynthetics,
Atlanta, GA, USA, April 1998, Vol. 2, pp. 845–850.
Miura, N. & Chai, J. C. (2000). Discharge capacity of prefabricated
vertical drains confined in clay. Geosynthetics International, 7, No.
2, 119–135.
Oostveen, J. P. (1983). Discussion to specialty session 6. Proceedings of
the 8th European Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation
Engineering, Helsinki, Finland, May 1983, Vol. 3, pp. 1152–1154.
Rixner, J. J., Kraemer, S. R. & Smith, A. D. (1986). Prefabricated
Vertical Drains, Federal Highway Administration Report FHWA/
RD-86/168, Vols I, II and II, Federal Highway Administration,
Washington, DC, USA.
Sasaki, S. (1981). Report of Experimental Test for the Prefabricated
Drain Geodrain, Tokyo Construction Co., Tokyo.
Stark, T. D., Williamson, T. A., Fowler, J., Pezza, D. & Gibbons, Y.
(1999). Prefabricated vertical-drain test section in Craney Island
dredged material management area. Journal of Performance of
Constructed Facilities, ASCE, 13, No. 1, 8–16.

The Editor welcomes discussion on all papers published in Geosynthetics International. Please email your contribution to
discussion@geosynthetics-international.com by 15 June 2011.

Geosynthetics International, 2010, 17, No. 6

Delivered by ICEVirtualLibrary.com to:

IP: 128.104.61.52
On: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 21:47:46
View publication stats