Gorelik, L. V. (1992). G&mxhnique 42, No.

1, 109-113

TECHNICAL NOTE

Settlement of soil layers of increasing thickness

L. V. GORELIK*

KEYWORDS: dams; settlement; strains; stress (Marsal, Leon Jc Flores, 1976). To understand the
analysis. causes of this agreement and disagreement for
calculated and observed settlements it is inter-
esting to analyse the simplifying assumptions of
INTRODUCTION the linear theory.
In order to be able to predict the behaviour of The first assumption is considered in detail
earth and rockfill dams and to control project below. The second assumption cannot lead to
assumptions it is necessary to calculate the settle- substantial errors in vertical pressure because the
ment of dams. Settlement formulae can also be relative unit weight variation of soil is small.
used to determine the modulus of deformation However, such a pressure calculation method
from observed vertical displacements by compar- could be erroneous if the soil modulus were to
ing measured and calculated values. vary its value in the horizontal direction (arch
During the construction of earth and rockfill effect). The third assumption becomes invalid
dams, vertical displacement in dams can be when the pore pressure dissipation or the defor-
regarded as the settlement of soil layers of mation changes of the soil from wetting are con-
increasing thickness. For example, at El Infier- siderable during the construction period (Gibson,
nillo, La Angostura and El Caracol dams 1958; Lee & Shen, 1969).
observed settlements during construction were In the present Paper the errors arising from use
closely represented by settlement formulae of the first simplifying assumption are estimated;
derived for one and two homogeneous soil layers this assumption is not satisfied in practice
(Marsal, 1958; Marsal, Arellano, Gusman & because the modulus of deformation depends on
Adame, 1976; Marsal, Moreno, Arenas, Guzman the stress. For instance, in the rolled fill of a 46 m
& SaldAna, 1976; Campos & Guzman, 1985). dam the tangent modulus of deformation at the
These formulae are based on the linear stress- base should be twice as much as that at the crest
strain relation and the following simplifying (Wilkins, 1968). For Brianne rockfill the tangent
assumptions. modulus of deformation at the base is three times
that at the crest (Cathie & Dungar, 1978).
(a) The vertical strain is proportional to the total The problem of settlement distribution for a
vertical stress (pressure). non-linear compression curve had been con-
(b) The total vertical pressure is equal to the sidered in an earlier publication (Gorelik, 1978).
product of the unit weight of the soil and the In the present Paper it is shown that the general
thickness of the overlying soil layer. properties of a settlement distribution against the
(c) The time effects do not affect soil deformation height are the same for linear and arbitrary non-
in the construction period. linear stress-strain relations. Comparison of the
Although settlement formulae have been settlements for these relations is made by a
derived for one and two homogeneous layers, the numerical method. The results are presented
linear theory can also be used to calculate settle- graphically for different values of modulus varia-
ment of the layer with the modulus depending on tion.
height. The formula for this case is cited in the
present Paper.
The linear theory holds true for the calculation SETTLEMENT IN RELATION TO HEIGHT
of the settlement of some dams; however, there The settlement distribution against the height
are also examples when the settlement of dams in a construction period for the linear compres-
does not conform with the theory referred to sion relation and one homogeneous layer can be
presented in the form (Marsal, 1958; Wilkins,
Discussion on this Technical Note closes 1 July 1992; 1968)
for further details see p. ii.
* Formerly B. E. Vedeneev All-Union Research Insti- S = (H - z)z
I (1)
tute of Hydraulic Engineering, Leningrad. 4
109
110 GORELIK

To derive the formula for the settlement of (c) The graph is concave downwards.
non-linear stress-strain relations a layer increas- (d) The tangent of the angle between the tangent
ing in thickness up to the value H in the con- line at the point z = 0 and the z axis is equal
struction period is considered. It is assumed that to the maximum strain in the layer.
the unit weight is constant and the strain of the
From (c) and (d) it can be concluded that the
soil depends only on the total stress. For soils a
settlement curve is located between tangent lines
vertical compression strain is a strictly monotonic
to this curve at the points z = 0 and z = H. From
function which increases with vertical stress
equation (4) it can be seen that S(0) = S(H) = 0.
(pressure).
All these properties are valid for a homoge-
The vertical stress at the point [ can be written
neous layer if the pore pressure or the pore pres-
in the form
sure dissipation is very small during the
Cl = Y(Z- i) (2) construction period because the strain in these
cases depends only on the total stress.
where 0 < [ < z < H. The proof of these properties is given in
At the end of the construction period the stress Appendix 1.
at the point [ is As these properties are valid for any arbitrary
stress-strain relation, they are also valid for the
02 = Y(H - i) (3)
settlement distribution which is governed by
The vertical settlement of the heterogeneous equation (1). It can therefore be concluded that
soil layer can be written as the shape of the stress-strain curve does not have
Z a significant influence on the settlement curve.
S(z) = C+J, >0 - 4cu 111di (4)
50
For the linear stress-strain relation E = c/E,([)
and from equations (2))(4) the settlement formula NUMERICAL EXAMPLE
can be given as To compare settlement values for linear and
non-linear stress-strain relations it is necessary to
(5) choose the non-linear function to approximate
the real curve and the ratio of the maximum
If the whole layer consists of N horizontal strains.
layers with different modulus E,, E,, . E,, As a non-linear function one can take the well-
E, and the co-ordinates of the upper boundary of known logarithmic compression curve (Lee &
each layer are zi, z2, . z,, . . zN = H respec- Shen, 1969; Peck, Hanson & Thornburn, 1974;
tively, the settlement is Cathie & Dungar, 1978)
s=nln(l+Bf~)
qz) = CH- z)z o<z<z, (8)
4 where a = C,/(l + eo) In 10, B = l/P, and
0 = AP. Maximum strains for linear si,,, and non-
S(z) = (H - z)
linear E, functions are
x (z - z,-1) + y
En k=l
(Zk- Zk-1)
4
z._~<z<z.
I (6b)
and
&I,,,= YHIE,

6, = a In (1 + ByH)
where z,, = 0 and n = 2, 3, . . N.
For the non-linear stress-strain relation case, a Putting these equal gives
homogeneous layer is considered. Because y is
YH
constant, equation (4) can be written in the form E, = (9)
a In (1 + ByH)
Z
S(z) = Cs(H - i) - e(z - 01 di (7) The settlement formula (1) can be written in the
s0 following dimensionless form
This equation governs the graph of the settlement
A, = 41(1 - ‘I) O<rl<l (10)
S against z which has the following properties.
(a) The maximum settlement in a layer is in half where
that layer’s depth. rj = zJH
(b) The graph is symmetrical with respect to the
middle of the depth of the layer. 1, = s JS,,
 SETTLEMENT OF SOIL LAYERS 111

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0 0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 .o 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
X 1

Fig. 1. Relation between strain ratio and relative stress Fig. 2. Settlement ratio plotted against relative height

and The result of the calculations in dimensionless

form is
S,, = Ha In (1 + ByH)/4 (11)

1
Using the parameters n(q) = 4 A _ (C ln C + B In B)
a In A
(16)
fl = E/E,
where
tl = ByH
1 = s/s,,
and
A=l+a
x = u/r~,,, = (H - z)JH (17)
B=l+aq
where 0 < x < 1, equation (11) may be written in
the form C=l+A--B J
In (1 + crx) It can be shown that I approaches I, if a + 0.
P= In (1 + r)
The variations of i, with 1 for different values of
tl are shown in Fig. 2. The curve n(q) is symmetri-
Stress is plotted against strain in dimensionless cal with respect to the point 9 = 0.5 and so the
form in Fig. 1 for different values of KY.The graphs are plotted for 0 d 9 < 0.5 only.
parameter a characterizes the non-linearity of the Figures 1 and 2 show that the difference
stress-strain relation. If tl = 0 this relation between the settlements for linear and non-linear
becomes linear. compressive curves is less than 10% for the wide
The tangent modulus of deformation is range of modulus variation

E(YH)
,--5
1 <

E(O)
which increases with pressure from a minimum This small difference shows why observed settle-
value of E(0) = l/aB to a maximum value of ments for soils with a real non-linear compressive
E(yH) = (1 + yBH)/aB. The modulus ratio curve are well represented by equation (1).
depends on a only

J%‘H)
-= 1 + a
(14) CONCLUSION
E(O) It has been shown that the non-linearity of the
If c( = 0, 1, 2 and 4 the modulus ratio (14) is stress-strain relation does not have a significant
equal to 1, 2, 3 and 5, respectively. For a = 0 the influence on the properties of the settlement
tangent modulus is E(0) = E(yH) = E,. curve. The settlement maxima for linear and non-
The settlement can be found by combining for- linear theories have the same location on the dis-
mulae (2)-(4) and (8) tribution curve and only a small difference in
their values. This explains the agreement between
S(z) = a ’ {In Cl + BY(H - 01 the observed settlements and those computed
s0 using linear theory. However, the linear theory
- In Cl + &(z - i)lI 4 (15) may not agree with a real settlement distribution,
112 GORELIK

when deformation changes considerably with and therefore the graph of S(z) is concave downwards
time due to the variation of pore pressure and and has its maximum at the point z, = H/2.
increasing water content. Another cause of dis- After translation of the z axis with the origin at z,,
agreement between the observed and calculated equation (19) gives
settlements may be non-one-dimensional strain of
the soil. In such cases a more complex method of I (24)
calculation is required.
where z’ = z - (H/2). Hence

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This Paper is dedicated to the memory of Pro-
$ (z’) = - 2 (_=‘)

fessor R. J. Marsal, who died on 2 December

1990-a remarkable scientist with outstanding
S(z’) = S( - z’) + c (25)
engineering intuition, whose investigations the initial conditions for which can be written as
prompted the work reported in this Technical
Note.
The Author thanks Engineer Edmund0
Moreno-Gomez for friendly help in connection
with his study of Professor Marsal’s works. He is Thus, from equation (25)
also indebted to S. Gwynn for much information c=o
and to Dr R. Rosen for helpful editorial com-
ments. S(z’) = S( -z’) (26)

The graph S(z) is therefore symmetrical with respect to

the middle of the depth of the layer.
APPENDIX 1. PROOF OF THE PROPERTIES OF THE From equation (19)
GRAPH S(z)
Using equation
shown to be
(7) the derivative S with respect to z is $ (0) =E(H) (27)

dS ’ ds(z - i) di where E(H) is the maximum strain in the layer.

-& = &(H - z) - &(z - 2) - - (18)
s II dz

As E(O)= 0 and

de dE(z - i)
z(z-n= -7 NOTATION
B parameter of compression curve
this gives C, compression index
E tangent modulus of deformation
dS E, modulus of deformation for linear deformation
z = &(H - z) - E(Z) (19) curve
e, initial void ratio
At the point z, the function S(z) will have an extreme H thickness of the layer after contruction
value if S settlement
S, settlement for linear deformation curve
E(H - Z,) = E(Z,) S ,m maximum settlement for linear deformation curve
z thickness of the layer during construction and the
which gives
point at which the settlement is determined
z, = H/2 (20) G( parameter of non-linearity of the deformation
curve
The second derivative of S(z) is
P relative strain
y unit weight
dzS de(H - z) ds(z)
_=p_- (21) E vertical compression strain
dz’ dz dz E, vertical strain for linear deformation curve
E,,,, maximum vertical strain for linear deformation
Using the new variable x = H - z gives
curve
ds(H ~ z) E, maximum vertical strain
p= _- d+) (22) [ vertical co-ordinate
dz dx
q relative co-ordinate
s(z) is an increasing function and so ds(x)/dx > 0. From 1 relative settlement
equation (21) I, relative settlement for linear deformation curve
d total vertical stress (pressure)
d’S/dz= < 0 (23) x relative depth
 SETTLEMENT OF SOIL LAYERS 113

REFERENCES Marsal, R. J. (1958). Settlement analysis of the President

Campos, J. M. & Guzman, M. A. (1985). Carlos
Ramirez Ulloa (El Caracol), Guerrero. Behaviour of
dams built in Mexico (1974-1984). Proc. 15th Int.
Congr. Large Dams, Lausanne 2, 7.1-7.49.
Cathie, D. N. & Dungar, R. (1978). Evaluation of finite
element predictions for constructional behaviour of
a rockfill dam. Proc. Instn. Ciu. Engrs, Part 2, 65,
Sept., 551-568.
Gibson, R. E. (1958). The progress of consolidation in a
clay layer increasing in thickness with time. GCotech-
ni& $, No. 4, 171382.
Gorelik. L. V. (1978). On the vertical settlement dis-
tribution in a Iaye; of soil. Izv. Vses. Nauchno-lssled.
Inst. Gidrotekh. 122, 24-27 (in Russian).
Lee, K. L. & Shen, C. K. (1969). Horizontal movements
related to subsidence. J. Soil Mech. Fndns Div. Am.
Sot. Ciu. Engrs 95, SM 1, 139-166.
Aleman Dam. Oaxaca, No. 5, l-20. Engng Inst.,
UNAM, Mexico (in Spanish).
Marsal, R. J., Leon, T. J. L. & Flores, N. J. (1976). Net-
zahualcoyotl. Behaviour of dams built in Mexico.
Proc. 12th Int. Congr. Large Dams, Mexico, 167-237.
Marsal, R. J., Arellano, L. R., Gusman, M. A. & Adame,
Z. H. (1976). El Infiernillo. Behaviour of dams built
in Mexico. Proc. 12th Int. Congr. Large Dams,
Mexico, 239-312.
Marsal, R. J., Moreno, E. G., Arenas, A. D., Guzman,
M. A. 8~ SaldAna, F. G. (1976). La Angostura.
Behaviour of dams built in Mexico. Proc. 12th Int.
Congr. Large Dams, Mexico, 313-39 1.
Peck, R. B., Hanson, W. E. & Thornburn, T. H. (1974).
Foundation Engineering. New York: Wiley.
Wilkins, J. K. (1968). Decked rockfill dams. Ciu. Engng
Trans. Instn Engrs Aust. CE 10, No. 1, 119-127.