Professional Documents
Culture Documents
MASTER`S THESIS
Numerical modeling of vacuum
consolidation
Scientific coordinators:
. l. Dr. Ing. NICOLETA ILIE
Technical University of Cluj-Napoca
Ao.Univ.-Prof. Dipl.-Ing. Dr.techn. HELMUT F. SCHWEIGER, M. Sc.
Graz University of Technology
Student:
Ing. LRINCZI TNDE
2012/2013
ABSTRACT
The topic of this Master`s Thesis is the numerical modeling of vacuum consolidation using
the measurements and data from recently realized projects. The vacuum mechanism is introduced in
PLAXIS 2D, trying to simulate an accurate numerical analysis comparing the results with the ones
obtained in the field.
This thesis contains five main parts:
1. Theory, a review of the meaning and empirical relations regarding the
vacuum consolidation from recent literature.
2. Case studies about two regions situated on clay type soils which were treated
with vacuum consolidation (Ballina Bypass and a container port at Cai Mep
River) and the modeling of this procedure in PLAXIS 2D finite element
program.
3. Comparison between axisymmetric (Ballina Bypass) and plain strain (Cai
Mep River) modeling of the vacuum consolidation.
4. The methodology used for the modeling of the vacuum consolidation, based
on the information gained during the modeling of the two case studies.
5. Conclusions, discussions over the results.
In the first part, the mechanism and purpose of the vacuum consolidation is described,
followed by the used principles and its theoretical background.
The second chapter contains the general information and the site geology of the two vacuum
treated area, followed by a numerical finite-element modeling and analysis with the PLAXIS 2D
finite-element program: introduction of the geometry and the soil parameters, introduction of the
construction phases and the selection of the proper analysis settings and types. During and after the
analysis the total settlements, the active pore water pressures, the effective principal stresses and the
total principal stresses were compared with the ones obtained in the case studies.
Chapter three contains a comparative analysis, between the axisymmetric and plain strain
model of the vacuum consolidation system, carried out to ensure ourselves about the accuracy of the
numerical modeling.
The fourth chapter is a synthesis of the method which was used to model the vacuum
consolidation.
The last part contains the conclusions and discussions over the values (the total settlements
active pore water pressures, principle effective stresses and principle total stresses) resulted from
the numerical analysis carried out by the PLAXIS 2D finite-element program, and the accuracy of
the model utilized to introduce the vacuum consolidation mechanism.
2 / 86
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT.2
TABLE OF CONTENTS3
1. THEORY.4
1.1. Introduction.4
1.2. Principles and mechanism of vacuum consolidation...5
2. CASE STUDIES..7
2.1. J. P. His and C. H. Lee7
2.1.1. Generalities...7
2.1.2. Site geology8
2.1.3. Construction histories and vacuum consolidation system.8
2.1.4. Numerical analysis with Plaxis 2D10
2.1.4.1. Geometrical modeling.10
2.1.4.2. Geotechnical modeling14
2.1.4.3. Analysis methodology..14
2.1.4.4. Calculations..24
2.1.4.5. Numerical results.29
2.2. Vacuum consolidation using drain elements...33
2.2.1. Generalities..33
2.2.2. Site geology..33
2.2.3. Numerical analysis with Plaxis 2D34
2.2.3.1. Geometrical modeling.34
2.2.3.2. Geotechnical modeling36
2.2.3.3. Analysis methodology..37
2.2.3.4. Calculations..39
2.2.3.5. Numerical results.40
3. COMPARISOM-AXYSIMMETRY AND PLANE STRAIN46
3.1. Introduction...46
3.2. Geometrical modeling and geotechnical modeling.46
3.3. Analysis methodology46
3.4. Numerical results...47
3.5. Conclusions50
4. METHODOLOGY OF THE NUMERICAL ANALYSIS....51
4.1. Generalities51
4.2. Methodology..51
5. CONCLUSIONS................................................................................. 55
REFERENCES.56
3 / 86
1. THEORY
1.1.
Introduction
Vacuum consolidation is a method used for preloading and consolidating soft and very soft
saturated fine-grained soils. The procedure consists of installing vertical and horizontal vacuum
transmission pipes under an airtight impervious membrane and evacuating the air below the
membrane producing an atmospheric pressure on the soil. [1]
This method is widely used for the improvement of soft clays in coastal areas, by the aid of
vertical drains under vacuum pressure, combined with preloading the system using a surcharge. In
many countries the construction, design and stability problems are economically significant in these
areas. After the installation of the prefabricated vertical drains, called PVDs, the drainage path
(radial flow) is shortened and that accelerates the time for the consolidation process. [2]
This system helps to dissipate the pore water pressure from the soil by increasing the radial
hydraulic gradient toward the drain. This increase is induced by the negative suction along the
drain, and in this way the accumulation of the excess pore water pressure in the soil is prevented
and the risk of failure is reduced. [2]
Currently there are two types of vacuum preloading systems commercially available:
a.) a membrane system with an airtight membrane over the drainage layer
b.) a membraneless system in which a vacuum system is connected to individual PVDs
surcharge loading. However, none of these solutions considered the effect of boundary conditions as
a result of different vacuum systems with time-dependent surcharge preloading. [2]
1.2.
The preloading helps to accelerate the vacuum consolidation method by increasing the
effective stress in the ground though an incremental change in the total stress, which is achieved by
placing preload fill on top of the existing ground. On the contrary, the vacuum consolidation
method preloads the entire soil mass at a constant total stress (Ihm & Masse 2002). [3]
This method was first introduced by Kjellman (1952) to improve the strength of soft clay.
The principles and mechanisms of vacuum preloading have been reported in various published
literature (e.g. Kjellman 1952, Chu et al. 2000, Ihm & Masse 2002, Indranata et. al. 2004). The
mechanism of vacuum consolidation can be easily simulated by revisiting Terzaghis (1943)
effective stress expression. In this the atmospheric pressure (Pa) is not considered in the effective
stress calculation because the effect is self-cancelling. In order to examine the principle of vacuum
consolidation, it is necessary to introduce the atmospheric pressure, Pa in the effective stress
calculation. [3]
The total stress and pore water pressure of the ground is given by: [3]
st = g*h + Pa (1.1) in which: st is the total stress
u = gw*h + Pa (1.2)
s is the effective stress
s= st u
(1.3)
u is the pore water pressure
g is the unit weight of soil
gw is the unit weight of water
h is the depth below the ground surface
Substituting equations (1.1) and (1.2) into equation (1.3) results: [3]
s= g*h - gw*h
(1.4)
As shown in equation (1.4), the effective stress of the ground is not affected by the
atmospheric pressure. However , if the atmospheric pressure is removed from the pore water
pressure by applying an equivalent vacuum suction i.e. -Pa, the final effective stress increases as a
result of the unbalanced atmospheric pressure acting above the ground, as shown below: [3]
s= g*h - gw*h + Pa
(1.5)
Another principle which illustrates the vacuum preloading method it is the spring analogy,
described in previous literatures by Kjellman (1952), Holtz (1975), Chen and Bao (1983), Chu et al.
(2000), and Indraratna et al. (2004).
The consolidation process of soil under surcharge load has been well understood and can
be illustrated using the spring analogy as shown in Figure 2(a). For the convenience of explanation,
the pressures in Figure 2 are given in absolute values and Pa is the atmospheric pressure. As shown
in Figure 2(a), the instance when a surcharge load, p, is applied, it is the excess pore water
pressure that takes the load. Therefore, for saturated soil, the initial excess pore water pressure, u0,
is the same as the surcharge p. Gradually, the excess pore water pressure dissipates and the load is
transferred from water to the spring (i.e., the soil skeleton) in the model shown in Figure 2(a).
The amount of effective stress increment equals to the amount of pore water pressure
dissipation, p u (Figure 2(a)). At the end of consolidation, u = 0 and the total gain in the
5 / 86
effective stress is the same as the surcharge, p (Figure 2(a)). It should be noted that the above
process is not affected by the atmospheric pressure, Pa.
The mechanism of vacuum preloading can also be illustrated in the same way using the
spring analogy as shown in Figure 2(b). When a vacuum load is applied to the system shown in
Figure 2(b), the pore water pressure in the soil reduces. As the total stress applied does not change,
the effective stress in the soil increases. The instance when the vacuum load, u, is applied, the
pore water pressure in the soil is still Pa. Gradually the pore pressure is reducing and the spring
starts to be compressed, that is, the soil skeleton starts to gain effective stress. The amount of the
effective stress increment equals to the amount of pore water pressure reduction, u, which will not
exceed the atmospheric pressure, Pa, or normally 80 kPa in practice. [4]
Figure 2. Spring analogy of consolidation process (a) under fill surcharge; (b) under vacuum
load. [4]
2.
CASE STUDIES
6 / 86
2.1.1. Generalities
This case study presents the simulation of the behavior of a soft soil treated with the vacuum
consolidation technique using the geotechnical finite element package PLAXIS 2D. [3]
A bridge approach embankment adjacent to a creek is underlain by soft clays up to 25m in
thickness. To enable safe construction of the embankment and speedy consolidation of the soft
clays, vacuum consolidation was chosen as a means of ground improvement. Detailed
instrumentation and monitoring was undertaken to closely monitor the performance of the
embankment. [3]
The measured settlements and pore water pressures at various embankment loading stages
were back-analyzed. [3]
Ballina Bypass is a section of the Pacific Highway to be upgraded in the north-east region
of New South Wales, Australia. The project involved the construction of approximately 11.4 km
length of four-lane dual carriageway bypassing the Ballina town center. [3]
Figure 3. Site layout plan of bridge approach at Emigrant Creek North, ECN
( after RTA 2006 ) [3]
Due to the presence of thick soft clays, embankment stability and settlement become a
major concern in the absence of appropriate ground improvement. To enable safe construction of
the embankment and speedy consolidation of the soft clays, the vacuum consolidation method was
chosen as a way to improve the ground. To increase the ground treatment efficiency, preloading and
surcharging have been incorporated with the vacuum consolidation method. [3]
Various field instruments, such as settlement plates, vibrating-wire piezometers and
inclinometers, have been installed to monitor the ground responses associated with the ground
treatment. [3]
This case study presents the geological site conditions, the vacuum consolidation system and
method implemented for ground improvement, the interpreted geotechnical model adopted for the
numerical analysis in Plaxis 2D and the detailed back-analysis of vacuum consolidation. [3]
2.1.2. Site geology
7 / 86
Total Fill
Thickness [m]
Equivalent Fill
Thickness [m]
Vacuum
Pressure [m]
1,99
1,82
-7,56
2,68
2,46
-8,02
5,4
4,68
-7,77
8 / 86
07
06.07.20
8,5
7,3
-7,38
07
06.07.20
8,5
6,73
-6,9
07
Table 1. Key construction histories of the approach embankment [3]
The vacuum pressure was transmitted into the ground through 34.0 mm diameter vertical
vacuum transmission piles installed in a square grid pattern at 1.0 m c/c. The pipes are extended
below at approximately 20.0 m depth. [3]
Figure 6. shows that the impervious membrane was laid on top of the working platform to
ensure an airtight region above the vertical transmission pipes. Some horizontal drains in the
transverse and longitudinal directions had been installed to increase the treatment efficacy.
Subsequently, these horizontal drains were connected to vacuum pumps. The edge of the
impervious membrane was sealed by a bentonite slurry trench as shown in Figure 6. [3]
Figure 6. Working platform and impervious membrane that form part of the vacuum
consolidation system [3]
Figure 7. shows the schematic diagram of the vacuum consolidation system. The key
advantage of this arrangement is that the suction head, generated by the pump, propagates along the
soil surface and down the vertical transmission piles within the airtight region, accelerating the
dissipation of excess pore water pressures. However, the efficacy of the entire system depends on
the ability of the membrane to prevent any air leaks to sustain a sufficient suction head (e. g.
Indraratna et al. 2004). [3]
9 / 86
2.1.4.1.
Geometrical modeling
The geometrical modeling is carried out in the Input program, and we can choose from two
geometry model: Plane strain
Axisymmetric
10 / 86
The Plane strain model is usually used at uniform cross sections with uniform loads which are
perpendicular to the cross section (z-axis). [5]
Four 6-noded element could form theoretically one 15-noded element while the total
number of nodes and stress points are equal, and this means that the 15-nodded element is more
powerful, they provide more accurate results, high quality stress states, high order of displacement
and pore pressure interpolation. In conclusion we choose the 15-noded triangle to model the
problem. [5]
The program sets the earth gravity acceleration to 9.8 m/s 2 by default and the direction of it
is pointing down vertically so it coincides with the negative y-axis. Gravity is included in the unit
weights so in this way gravity is controlled by the total load multiplier for weights of materials.
Independent acceleration may be prescribed using the x and y-acceleration fields used for
dynamical analysis, which is not our case, so we leave the standard settings. [5]
After introducing the project properties we define the model properties.
After defining the project properties the general layout program appears where we model the
geometry of the problem.
For the vertical vacuum transmission pipes the effective zone of influence it has the form of
a cylindrical column around the pipe. The equivalent diameter which affects the soil is considered
1.13xs, where s is the distance between two centers of adjacent transmission pipes, in our case it is
1m, so the equivalent diameter it will be 1.13 m. [3]
The soil adjacent to the drain can be disturbed due to the installation process of the vertical
transmission pipe. As a result, the permeability of the disturbed soil decreases causing a reduced
consolidation process. This effect is described as smear.
The smear effect was modeled in the finite element analysis by defining a small smear zone
adjacent to the circular drain as shown in Figure 14. The zone of smear is assumed to have reduced
permeability, khs, and a radius, rs measured from the center of the drain, as shown in Figure 14. [3]
These parameters can be calculated considering the following proportions which were
selected to match the obtained results in the field: kh/khs=4
rs/rp=4
where: rp radius of the pipe
rs radius of the smear zone
kh undisturbed soil permeability
khs permeability of the smear zone
The vacuum pipes have a diameter of 34mm. [3]
2.1.4.2.
Geotechnical modeling
The geotechnical model used for the back-analysis is shown in Table 2. in which the values
were derived based on the results of the site investigations and the back-analysis of the field
monitoring data. The initial void ratio, e0, is considered to be 2.1. [3]
Table 2.
Subsoil
profile and geotechnical parameters. [3]
In this table: -g.sat is saturated unit weight of soil
-kv=kh/2 are the vertical and horizontal permeability values
-Cc and Cr are the compression and recompression indices
-OCR is the over-consolidation ratio
2.1.4.3.
Analysis methodology
In PLAXIS 2D there are a several material models describing the non-linear stress-strain
behavior from which we can choose:
Linear elastic model: This model represents Hookes law of isotropic linear
elasticity. The linear elastic model is too limited for the simulation of soil behavior. It
is primarily used for stiff structures in the soil.
Hardening soil model: This is an advanced model for the simulation of soil behavior.
The Hardening Soil model is an elasto-plastic type of hyperbolic model, formulated
14 / 86
Soft Soil model: This is a Cam-Clay type model that can be used to simulate the
behavior of soft soils like normally consolidated clays and peat. The model performs
best in simulations of primary compression.
Soft soil creep model: This is a second order model formulated in the framework of
visco-plasticity. The model can be used to simulate the time-dependent behavior of
soft soils like normally consolidated clays and peat. The model includes logarithmic
primary and secondary compression.
Modified Cam-Clay model: This well-known critical state model can be used to
simulate the behavior of normally consolidated soft soils. The model assumes a
logarithmic relationship between the volumetric strain and the mean effective stress.
NGI-ADP model: The NGI-ADP model may be used for capacity, deformation and
soil-structures interaction analysis involving undrained loading of clay. Distinct
anisotropic stress strengths may be defined for different stress paths.
User-defined soil models: With this option it is possible to use other constitutive
models than the standard PLAXIS models. [5]
Taking into consideration the soil type (soft clay), the need of time-dependent analysis and
the geotechnical parameters given we can reduce the possibly good material models to the Soft Soil
model and the Modified Cam-Clay model.
The best fitting material model, which was used in the original paper, would have been the
Modified Cam-Clay model, but after numerous calculations and settings we have to exclude this
kind of material model, while is giving inaccurate results.
Therefore, to simulate the multiple loading phases of the system and the interaction between
the soil skeleton and the excess of pore water pressure, the Soft Soil Model was chosen.
15 / 86
Especially meant for the primary compression analysis of near normally-consolidated clay-type
soils, the Soft Soil model is better capable to model this kind of behavior than the Hardening Soil
model. [6]
As soft soils we consider near-normally consolidated clays, clayley silts and peat. A special
feature of such materials is their high degree of compressibility. This is the best demonstrated by
oedometer test data as reported for instance by Janbu in his Rankine lecture (1985).
Considering tangent stiffness moduli at a reference oedometer pressure of 100 kPa, the
reports for normally consolidated clays vary between Eoed=1 to 4 MPa, depending on the particular
clay considered. The differences between these values and the stiffness for NC-sands are
considerable as here we have values in the range of 10 to 50 MPa, at least for non-cemented
laboratory samples. Hence, in oedometer testing normally consolidated clays behave ten times
softer than normally consolidated sands.
This illustrates the extreme compressibility of soft soils. Some features of the Soft Soil
model are:
Stress dependent stiffness (logarithmic compression behavior).
Distinction between primary loading and unloading-reloading.
Memory for pre-consolidation stress.
Failure behavior according to the Mohr-Coulomb criterion. [6]
ISOTROPIC STATES OF STRESS AND STRAIN (s1=s2=s3)
Between the volumetric strain (v) and the mean effective stress (p) a logarithmic relation is
considered:
v- v0=-*ln(
(2.1)
(2.2)
The modified swelling index (*) determines the compressibility of the material in
subsequent reloading and unloading, but differs from the index (Burland, 1965). However * and
* are not equal with
and but their ratio
is equal with
Burlands ratio
[6]
The soil is
elastic after Hookes
and reloading, and
denoted
by
the
equation above. [6]
assumed to behave
law during unloading
this elastic behavior is
superscript e in the
16 / 86
Figure 16. Logarithmic relation between volumetric strain and mean stress. [6]
The isotropic unloading and reloading path implies linear stress dependency on the tangent
bulk modulus such that: [6]
Kur=
= .
(2.3)
In the equation above the unloading and reloading is denoted by the subscript ur, but despite
this fact not undrained soil properties but effective parameters are used. As constant input
parameters ur and * are used for that part of the model which computes the elastic strains, instead
of the elastic bulk modulus (Kur) and Youngs elastic modulus (Eur). [6]
The parameter pp denotes the value of the isotropic pre-consolidation stress, which can take
more values corresponding to different lines of unloading/reloading. This represents the highest
stress level occurring in the soil, and remains constant during the unloading and reloading. [6]
In primary loading with the increase of the stress level the pre-consolidation stress increases
too, causing plastic (irreversible) volumetric strains. [6]
YIELD FUNCTION FOR TRIAXIAL STRESS STATE (s2=s3)
With the Soft Soil model we can model the behavior of soils under general states of stress,
but with restriction to triaxial loading conditions under which s2=s3, and the yield function for
such state of stress is defined as = -pp where is a function of the stress state (p,q) and the preconsolidation stress (pp), is a function of plastic strain: [6]
(2.4)
(2.5)
In the equation above represents the yield function which describes an ellipse in p-q
plane, and the parameter M determines the height of the ellipse, which is responsible, in primary
one-dimensional compression, for the ratio of horizontal vertical stresses. That means that M
determines the coefficient of lateral earth pressure K0nc and considering this, M can be chosen in that
way to match the primary one-dimensional compression, K0nc. This interpretation and the use of M
differs from the original idea of the critical state line, but in change matches properly the value of
K0nc. [6]
17 / 86
Figure 17. Yield surface of the Soft Soil model in p-q plane. [6]
All tops of the ellipses can be found on a line with the slope M in the p-q plane. After
Burland, the M-line is considered to be the critical state line, representing the stress states at post
peak failure, and parameter M is determined with the use of the critical state friction angle.
However, in the Soft Soil model the critical state is not necessarily related to failure, but in the
Mohr-Coulomb model failure criterion depends on the strength parameters of the soil, and c, and
the failure line might not correspond to the Soft Soil M-line. The extension of the ellipse along the
p axis is determined by pp (isotropic pre-consolidation stress), and every value of the preconsolidation stress defines an ellipse during loading, which results in an infinite number of
ellipses. [6]
When p 0, there is tension and the ellipse extends to ccot. To ensure that the right side of
the ellipse remains in compression zone (p 0), a minimum value is adopted for ccot, which is the
minimum unit value for pp when c=0. [6]
Following the hardening relation, the value of pp is determined by volumetric plastic strain.
The exponential increase of the pre-consolidation stress with decreasing volumetric plastic strain
(compaction) is also reflected by the hardening relation, and Pp0 can be considered to be equal with
the initial value of the pre-consolidation stress, in which case the volumetric plastic strain is
considered to be zero. [6]
The irreversible volumetric strain in primary compression is described by the yield function,
forming the cap of the yield contour. Failure state is modeled by revisiting Mohr-Coulombs
perfectly-plastic yield function which represents a straight line in the p-q plane as shown in Figure
17. The M-line slope is greater than the slope of the failure line. [6]
The boundary of the elastic stress area is considered to be the total yield contour. In primary
compression the cap can increase, but the failure line is constant, is fixed. If we choose any stress
paths from the interior of this boundary, they give elastic strain increments only, and the stress paths
which cross the boundary give both plastic and elastic strain increments. [6]
The plastic behavior of the Soft Soil model for general states of stress is defined by six yield
functions, three compression yield functions and three Mohr-Coulomb yield functions. The total
yield contour in principal stress space, formed by these six yield functions, is shown in Figure 18.
[6]
18 / 86
Figure 17. Representation of total yield contour of the Soft Soil model in principal stress
space. [6]
PARAMETERS OF THE SOFT SOIL MODEL
The Soft Soil model requires the following constants: [6]
Basic parameters:
* - Modified compression index
* - Modified swelling index
c - Cohesion
- Friction angle
Dilatancy angle
Advanced parameters:
ur Piossons ratio for unloading/reloading
K0nc- Coefficient of lateral stress in normal consolidation
M - K0nc-parameter
For the advanced parameters is recommended to use the default settings. [6]
MODIFIED COMPRESSION INDEX AND MODIFIED SWELLING INDEX.
From isotropic unloading and isotropic compression test these parameters can be obtained
easily. If the logarithm of the mean stress is plotted as a function of volumetric strain for clay-type
materials, we can approximate two straight lines for the slope of primary loading, which gives the
modified compression index, and the slope of the unloading (swelling), which gives the modified
swelling index. [6]
Another way to determine the modified compression index and modified swelling index is
using the existing relationship between the one-dimensional compression and recompression, also
known as Cc and Cr (assumed to be equal with Cs). With the use of these parameters we can describe
19 / 86
a relationship between them and the Cam-Clay parameters, or between them and the internationally
normalized parameters: [6]
Relationship to Cam-Clay parameters:
*=
(2.6)
*=
(2.7)
*=
(2.8)
*=
(2.9)
In the first two relations a constant value is assumed for the void ratio, e. For the void ratio
the initial value can be used or the average void ratio which occurs during the compression
test. [6]
In the third relation the factor 2.3 is obtained from the logarithm of base 10 and the natural
logarithm ratio. [6]
In relation four between the modified swelling index and the one-dimensional swelling
index there is no exact relation, so as an approximation it is assumed that the average state
during unloading is isotropic, meaning that the horizontal and vertical stresses are equal. [6]
The value of the
ratio generally varies between 2.5 and 7. [6]
COHESION:
The cohesion has the dimension of stresses, and any value can be used for the cohesion
including even a cohesion equal with zero. Giving the cohesion a value, leads into an elastic region,
which is located partly in the tension zone. The intersection at the left side between the ellipse and
p-axis is at the value of ccot. [6]
For maintaining in the pressure zone of the stress space at the right hand side of the ellipse,
the isotropic pre-consolidation stress pp has a minimum value of ccot. This means that an overconsolidation state can be reached if to the cohesion value a larger number than zero is assigned,
and the magnitude of this state depends on the value of cohesion and on the initial stress state. This
means that as soon as the loads are applied, a stiffer behavior is obtained. It is not possible to
specify the undrained shear strength by means of high cohesion and a friction angle of zero. The
input of the parameters necessary for this material model should be always based on effective stress
values, which can be realized by using Undrained (A) drainage type. [6]
The resulting effective stress state and path may not be entirely correct which leads to
inaccurate values of the undrained shear strength. [6]
FRICTION ANGLE:
By definition, the effective angle of internal friction is the increment of shear strength with
effective stress level and has the unit of degrees. Care should be taken when using high values for
the friction angle but zero values are not allowed either. The recommended value would be the
critical state friction angle instead of the high values, based on small strains. [6]
DILATANCY ANGLE:
The dilatancy angle can be neglected for the material types modeled with the Soft Soil
model and the program uses the value of zero as a default setting. [6]
20 / 86
POISSONS RATIO:
The Poissons ratio in the soft soil model is considered to be pure elastic constant rather than
the pseudo-elasticity constant as used in the linear elastic perfectly-plastic model. Usually the value
of Poissons ratio is between 0.1 and 0.2. When using the Soft Soil model with its standard settings,
the Poissons ratio of unloading/reloading (ur) is automatically equal with 0,15. This ratio plays a
minor role at the loading of normally consolidated materials but plays an essential role in unloading
calculations, for example at the unloading in a one-dimensional compression test (oedometer),
Poissons ratio is relatively small and that will result in a small decrease of the lateral stress in
comparison with the decrease of the vertical stresses. This leads to the increase of the ratio between
the horizontal and vertical stresses, a well-known phenomenon in over-consolidated materials. This
is why Poissons ratio is based on the ratio of horizontal and vertical stress increments and not on
the normally consolidated K0nc value. [6]
Poissons ratio at unloading/reloading using horizontal and vertical stress increments: [6]
(2.10)
K0nc-PARAMETER:
The determination of M is a function of K0nc, which is automatically determined by the
program, based on the coefficient of lateral earth pressure in normally consolidated condition. The
relation between K0nc and M is given by Brinkgreve (1994): [6]
(2.11)
The
value of M is shown
in the input
window and it is
influenced by Poissons ratio (ur) and by the ratio of
but the influence of K0nc is the most
dominant. The value of M can be approximated with: M 3.0-2.8 K0nc [6]
Taking into consideration all the aforementioned facts and using Table 2. we can derive the
geotechnical parameters necessary for the Soft Soil model:
;
;
22 / 86
The total water pore pressure has two components, the steady state pore pressure and the
excess pore pressure:
.[6]
Steady state pore pressures are generated based on the phreatic level, so they are considered
as input data. Excess pore pressures are generated during the calculations. [6]
When we use the drainage type Undrained (A) we must take care of the dilatancy angle ()
which should be equal with zero. If we use a positive dilatancy angle the tensile pore pressures and
shear strength might just reach some unrealistically large values. In the other hand, if we use
negative values for the dilatancy angle, that might lead to high pore pressures and unrealistic
liquefication type of behavior. [6]
HYDRAULIC DATA SETS AND MODELS
Plaxis provides different data sets and models to model the flow in the saturated soil.
The available data sets are the following:
Standard
Hypres
USDA
Staring
User-defined
23 / 86
Staring: This classification system is mainly used in The Netherlands and also uses the Van
Genuchten and the Approximate Van Genuchten hydraulic models and makes distinction between
topsoil and subsoil. This has the largest scale of soil types. [6]
User-defined: This option enables the user to define saturated or unsaturated soils manually.
[6]
While we have soft clay in the affected area, we use the USDA soil classification. This has
the proper amount of classification types and its an international classification system. [6]
As for the flow parameter we will use the Van Genuchten model. The Soil Water
Characteristic Curves (SWCCs) are introduced to describe the hydraulic parameters of the
groundwater flow. The SWCC describes the capacity of the soil to keep water at different stresses.
[6]
INITIAL SETTINGS
In the last window of the material data set we have to set the initial in-situ stresses.
The initial in-situ stresses of the ground are crucial to the numerical modeling as they
influence the magnitude of ground displacement. These stresses are affected by the previous
stresses experienced by the soil.
In the finite element model, the in-situ stresses are generated using the K0- procedure. [3]
The K0-value can be generated automatically by the program or can be introduced manually,
in which case is calculated based on Jakys formula: [7]
K0=1-sin
(2.12)
Care must be taken with very low or very high K0-values, since they can bring the initial
stress in a state of failure. [7]
2.1.4.4.
Calculations
To carry out the calculations we open the Calculation program and for the current project,
the following construction stages have been defined to simulate the multiple construction stages of
the preloading and the vacuum consolidation process where the groundwater-flow plays a crucial
part:
The fill loading, sfill is calculated as the sum of the full embankment loading above the
water table and the submerged fill loading below the water table as shown below:
sfill=Heq*gfill=(H-)*gfill+*(gfill-gw) [3]
(2.13)
As
Classical mode: This is the default analysis (calculation) mode using Terzaghis definition
of stress (
), where pore pressures are divided into steady-state pore pressures (are input
parameters, while they are generated from phreatic level) and excess pore pressures (generated in
the undrained material during calculations). The weight of the soil is taken into account according
to its position compared with the phreatic level. The soil which is situated below this level is taken
into account with its saturated weight (.sat) and the soil which is situated above the phreatic level is
taken into account with its unsaturated weight (.unsat).The value of suction is considered to be
always equal with zero and the degree of saturation is always equal with one. [6]
The types of calculations which can be performed in this mode are: [6]
-Plastic
-Consolidation based on excess pore pressures
-Safety
-Dynamic
not our case
-Free vibration
Advanced mode: Using Bishops (
saturation) definition of stress instead of Terzaghis, its a suitable calculation mode for the
unsaturated response of soils and for performing fully coupled hydro-mechanical behavior of soils.
The suction pore pressure has a total influence over the effective degree of saturation, which
relationship is called the Soil Water Characteristic Curve (SWCC-described by Van Genuchten and
Approximated Van Genuchten). If the SWCC parameters change that might change the effective
stresses in the partially saturated zone, which causes a difference in the results obtained in the
Advanced mode compared to the results obtained in the Classical mode. This is the reason why it is
strongly recommended to select proper values for SWCC. [6]
The weight of the soil is taken into account according to its position compared with the
phreatic level and the weight of the soil is defined as: =(1-Se)unsat+Sesat. [6]
The types of calculations which can be performed in this mode are: [6]
-Plastic
-Consolidation based on total pore pressures
-Safety
- Dynamic
not our case
-Free vibration
Flow mode: In this mode pure groundwater flow calculations under saturated and
unsaturated conditions can be performed. [6]
25 / 86
The types of calculations which can be performed in this mode are: [6]
-Groundwater flow (steady-state)
- Groundwater flow (transient) [6]
not our case
To decide which calculation mode suits better our case, we take a simple model, to simulate
the calculation modes with every possible flow type. All the possible calculation modes which the
program allows us to perform are shown in the figure below:
consideration only the general phreatic level. This kind of pore water pressure generation is capable
only of creating a steady state pore pressure state in the soil.
Figure 19. Pore pressure generated with From previous phase and by Phreatic level in plastic
and consolidation analysis
Steady-state groundwater-flow generation considers a permanent flow, which means that the
pore pressures are independent of time so they are generated as steady-state pore pressures. This
means that the boundary condition is taken into consideration as soon as it is applied, and it appears
at the active pore pressures, but this flow is considered constant with time (Figure 20.). Also we
have to mark the fact that only the negative pore pressures are taken into consideration, and the
positive ones are neglected. The cause of this situation will be further examined.
Even though the final results are very similar, we have to notice the fact, that during a plastic
calculation (Figure 20.) the variation of the active pore pressures is linear, which is explained by the
fact that in a plastic calculation time effects are not taken into consideration. In the other hand, in
the consolidation analysis (Figure 21.) we can see the incremental change of the active pore
pressures, showing the fact, that consolidation analysis takes into consideration the time effects.
27 / 86
Figure 20. Pore pressure generated by Steady state with Plastic analysis
Figure 21. Pore pressure generated by Steady state with Consolidation analysis
The only time-dependent calculation of the pore water pressures is the Transient
groundwater-flow calculation, which takes into consideration the time effects and the changing
boundary conditions.
Considering the aforementioned facts, we can exclude the Plastic analysis, which means that
only the Transient groundwater-flow pore pressure generation with Consolidation analysis needs to
be further analyzed.
28 / 86
29 / 86
30 / 86
the one obtained in the case study, which shows that is possible to model vacuum consolidation in
PLAXIS 2D. [3]
Figure 26. Selected points for the curves, total displacements and active pore pressures
2.2.1. Generalities
33 / 86
This case study presents the modeling and results of a finite element analysis carried out for
a reclamation project in Vietnam. The two-dimensional behavior of a soft soil embankment
incorporating prefabricated vertical drains was analyzed with the finite element package PLAXIS
2D. The finite element analysis is carried out with fully coupled flow-stress analysis considering
unsaturated soil condition. The vacuum induced suction (negative pore pressure) is modeled using
vertical drain elements where we describe flow boundary condition. To simulate the non-linear
behavior of the soft soil layers, advanced constitutive modeling was considered. [1]
In this case study the obtained results are presented and the compared with the values from
the proposed two-dimensional finite element analysis in PLAXIS 2D.
The main purpose of this study with finite elements was to analyze the consolidation and the
lateral displacements of soft soils with prefabricated vertical drains (PVD) under vacuum
consolidation. [1]
For simplicity a two-dimensional idealization was used with the combination of the Soft
Soil model. As flow characteristics equivalent permeability was used based on the equal discharge
rate in the model and in the field. The vacuum pressure was simulated by prescribing negative pore
pressure-time history on the prefabricated vertical drain (PVD) boundaries and sand blanket. [1]
The purpose is to demonstrate the capability of the finite element method to properly model
vacuum consolidation. [1]
Applying the backfill and considering the compressibility of the soft subsoil, a settlement of
several meters is anticipated and a dredging is foreseen too along the berth to allow necessary water
draft for the vessels to approach the berth. This will have an effect on the general stability of the
riverbank land. [1]
This is the reason why extensive ground improvement works have been made to overcome
those important settlements and to ensure the stability of the riverbank. [1]
Geometrical modeling
As project properties 15-noded Plane strain model was chosen along with the overall model
dimensions of 450 m in horizontal direction and 135 m in vertical direction.
After introducing the geometrical dimensions mechanical and hydraulic boundary
conditions were prescribed as the figure shows.
Figure 31. The geometry of the model with the prescribed boundary conditions
After the geometrical modeling a medium dense mesh was generated and then refined at the
vacuum treatment area to provide a higher order interpolation for displacements and pore pressures.
The prefabricated drains (PVDs) are 45 m long and they are inserted in the soft soil layers
and the drainage layer installed in the top of the soft soil layer to channel the water toward the
periphery of the threated area. The drainage layer consists of a clean coarse sand blanket with
horizontal drain network. [1]
35 / 86
The PVDs are a slender, synthetic drainage elements made out of a drainage core wrapped
in geotextile filter and they have rectangular cross-section (band-shaped). [1]
Figure 34. Comparison of 1D PLAXIS plane strain consolidation results with Barron's law [1]
When the equivalent horizontal permeability values were set up, the void ratio was not taken
into consideration. [1]
36 / 86
Figure 35. Comparison of axisymmetric unit cell radial flow into plane strain flow [1]
2.2.3.2.
Geotechnical modeling
The modeled ground has 7 soil layers with a sand fill on top of them, which is brought to
build the embankment. The assumed model properties are summarized in Table 6.
All material properties were defined in terms of effective stress parameters (stiffness and
strength), and for all the soft soil layers undrained behavior was assigned. [1]
2.2.3.3.
Analysis methodology
37 / 86
To simulate the multiple loading phases of the system and the interaction between the soil
skeleton and the excess of pore water pressure, the Soft Soil Model was chosen for the upper soft
soil layers, and for the lower impermeable layers the Mohr-Coulomb model was used. [1]
In the second chapter the characteristics of the Soft Soil model were described so addition to
that the characteristics of the Mohr-Coulomb model are described below.
Plasticity is associated with the development of irreversible strains. In order to evaluate
whether or not plasticity occurs in a calculation, a yield function, f, is introduced as a function of
stress and strain. Plastic yielding is related with the condition f=0. This condition can often be
presented as a surface in principal stress space. A perfectly-plastic model is a constitutive model
with a fixed yield surface, i.e. a yield surface that is fully defined by model parameters and not
affected by (plastic) straining. For stress states represented by points within the yield surface, the
behavior is purely elastic and all strains are reversible. [6]
LINEAR ELASTIC PERFECTLY-PLASTIC BEHAVIOUR [6]
The basic principle of elasto-plasticity is that we can decompose the strains and strain rates
into an elastic and plastic part:
= e +p
(2.15)
To relate the stress rates to the elastic strain rates Hookes law is used:
s=Dee=De(- p)
(2.16)
According to Hills classical theory of plasticity (1950), plastic strains are proportional to
the derivative of the yield function with taking into consideration the stresses. The theory of
associated plasticity overestimates the dilatancy of the Mohr-Coulomb type yield functions. To
remediate this problem, a plastic potential function g is introduced and added to the yield function.
If g
we talk about non-associated plasticity, and in general, the plastic strain rates are written as:
p=
(2.17)
In this equation is the plastic multiplier, which for elastic behavior is zero and for plastic
behavior is positive.
(2.18a)
f1b=
(2.18b)
f1c=
(2.18c)
f1d=
(2.18d)
f1e=
(2.18e)
f1f=
(2.18f)
The two plastic model parameters appearing in the yield functions are the well-known
friction angle and the cohesion c. The condition fi = 0 for all yield functions together (where fi is
used to denote each individual yield function) represents a fixed hexagonal cone in principal stress
space as shown in Figure 37.
Figure 37. The Mohr-Coulomb yield surface in principle stress space (c=0)
BASIC PARAMETERS OF THE MOHR-COULOMB MODEL [6]
Five parameters are required to the linear elastic perfectly-plastic Mohr-Coulomb model,
which can be obtained from basic tests on soil samples.
These parameters are as they follow:
E Youngs modulus
Poissons ratio
c Cohesion
39 / 86
Friction angle
Dilatancy angle
HYDRAULIC DATA SETS AND MODELS
For the soft soil top layers Undrained (A) behavior was assigned, and Drained condition for
the lower layers (layer 3 and 4). For the impermeable layers Non-porous setting was chosen. [1]
2.2.3.4.
Calculations
The governing equation of the elasto-plastic behavior of soft soils, under the consolidation
process, is considered to be based on total pore pressures, following Biot theory (1941). The
formulation is based on small strain theory and Darcys law when groundwater flow is assumed.
For the formulation of stress states Bishops effective stress (Bishop & Blight, 1963) is used and its
defined by: [1]
s=s+mpw s+mSepw
(2.19)
where s is the total stress, s is the effective stress, pw is the pore water pressure and m is a vector
containing unity terms for normal stress components and zero terms for the shear stress
components. Se is the effective degree-of-saturation which approximates the effective stress
parameter, (matric suction coefficient) varying from 0 to 1. This covers the range from dry to
fully saturated conditions. [1]
Therefore the calculation mode which we choose is the Advanced mode.
The vacuum pressure applied along the drain is modeled as a uniform distributed total water
head defined as the difference between the steady state pore water pressure and the suction excess
pore pressure induced by the vacuum pva. [1]
(2.20)
For this project the following construction stages have been defined:
Phase 0: Initial stress definition assuming drained behavior for all constitutive soil
layers (K0-procedure)
Phase 1: Drain installation without vacuum (Plastic analysis assuming instantaneous
loading)
Phase 2: Consolidation over 60 days (Coupled flow-stress analysis)
Phase 3: Installation vacuum at 35 kPa (Coupled flow-stress analysis with depression
applied over 1 day)
Phase 4: Consolidation over 20 days (Coupled flow-stress analysis)
Phase 5: Add 2 m fill and increase vacuum depression to 65 kPa (Coupled flow
stress analysis with additional depression and loading applied over 1 day)
Phase 6: Consolidation over 60 days at 65 kPa vacuum pressure (Coupled flowstress analysis)
Phase 7: Add 2 m fill (Coupled flow-stress analysis with loading applied over 1 day)
Phase 8: Consolidation over 40 days at 65 kPa vacuum pressure (Coupled flowstress analysis)
Phase 9: Add 2.7 m fill (Coupled flow-stress analysis with loading applied over 1
day)
40 / 86
Phase 10: Consolidation over 110 days at 65 kPa vacuum pressure (Coupled flowstress analysis) [1]
The evolution of distributed pore pressure load created by realizing the fill layers as well as
the effective vacuum pressure are summarized in the figure below: [1]
2.2.3.5.
Numerical results
To follow the main parameters eight Gauss points K, L, M, N, O, R, P, and Q were chosen in
the center of the layers 1a1, 1a2, 1b and 1c. The analyses which we follow are: total vertical stress,
effective vertical stress and active pore pressure. [1]
Figure 39. Location of Gauss points and nodes for results post-processing [1]
The figures below show the evolution of total vertical stresses at different depths in the
middle of each layer in the vacuum consolidation area and the result are very similar to the original
ones from the paper, and they show the following expected results:
The total stress value increases after each completed fill layer, and then remains constant.
41 / 86
The vacuum applied between 60 and 80 days does not have any effect on the total stress
value.
The evolution of the total stress at different depth it is matching the results in the paper
which are in good agreement with analytical results according to the construction sequence.
[1]
42 / 86
Figure 41. Total vertical stress variation with time from the original project [1]
In Figure 42. the variation of active pore pressure (psteady+pexcess) is given by the function of
time and the results show us that:
With every finished fill layer the pore pressure increases immediately and it is equal with the
applied total stress.
The pore pressures decrease during the consolidation period.
The vacuum treatment (applied between 60 and 80 days) leads to further decrease of the
active pore pressure which is equal with the applied vacuum pressure. [1]
43 / 86
Figure 43. Active pore pressures variation with time in the original project [1]
The evolution of effective stresses is presented in Figure 44. at the same depths as
considered before. Even though the effective stresses are not fully stabilized at the end of the
calculation, the positive effect of the vacuum can still be observed, which increases the rate of the
effective stress growth, being very useful to evaluate the possible amount of the mobilized friction
with time. [1]
44 / 86
Figure 45. Effective vertical stresses with time in the original project [1]
Figure 46., 47. and 48. summarizes the evolution of the vacuum pressure induced
displacements. They show the ability of the vacuum consolidation process to generate horizontal
displacements inwards the threated area, like it should happen in a porous soil. This information
could be important in the case in which we have building in the surrounding area, but is important
in the design state as well. [1]
Figure 47. Original global view of horizontal displacements at 290 days [1]
45 / 86
Figure 48. shows the typical slope failure mechanism, obtained with a phi-c reduction
analysis, which was obtained after 290 days as a result of the preloading and consolidation of the
soft soil. [1]
Figure 48. Deformed mesh at safety analysis after 6,7 m fill construction [1]
Table 7. summarizes the values obtained after each realized fill layer and at the end of the
calculation. The factor of safety was obtained by using a phi-c reduction analysis for the situation
with and without vacuum treatment. When the vacuum is not introduced into the calculation as a
head condition, its effect is taken into consideration by an additional load to the ones which result
from the fill load. In this way an equivalent state of effective stress state is generated and
comparable settlement rate after each fill construction. This way we can make a fair comparison of
the safety factors obtained with both considerations. [1]
Factor of safety
Vacuu No
Vacuu No
m
vacuum
m
vacuum
Phase 5: After 2 m fill (81 days)
2.57
1.12
2.5
1.08
Phase 7: After 4 m fill (141
2.07
1.16
2.01
1.12
days)
Phase 9: After 6,47 m fill (181
1.52
1
1.46
1
days)
Phase 10: Finall (290 days)
1.96
2.04
1.89
1.98
Table 7. Factor of safety [1] (row 1, 2-original and row 3, 4-calculated) [1]
The safety factors obtained with the active vacuum is considerably higher than the one
obtained with the equivalent vacuum load. This means that preloading combine with vacuum
consolidation improves better the mechanical characteristics of the soil then only preloading. [1]
As a conclusion to the second case study we can say that the capability of the finite element
method to properly model vacuum consolidation in plane-strain with drain elements has been
demonstrated. [1]
It has been shown that the finite element model could show the following:
Increase in the effective stresses as the level of vacuum pressure gets higher.
Lateral displacements induced by the vacuum suction.
Increase of the factor of safety when a soil is treated with vacuum pressure. [1]
46 / 86
Introduction
To see if we really can rely on the solution proposed by the axisymmetrical solution with the
boundary condition, we take out one drain element from the second case study and model it with
axisymmetric 15-noded project properties.
After the calculations are carried out we compare the active pore pressures, effective stresses
and total stresses with those from the original case study. If the result are similar we can claim that
the setting used for the axisymmetric boundary condition were correct.
3.2.
3.3.
Analysis methodology
We use the same analysis methodology as we used with the drain elements.
We carry out Consolidation analysis with Transient groundwater-flow in Advanced
mode.
We define the same phases as at the previous case study:
Phase 0: Initial stress definition assuming drained behavior for all constitutive soil
layers (K0-procedure)
Phase 1: Drain installation without vacuum (Plastic analysis assuming instantaneous
loading)
Phase 2: Consolidation over 60 days (Coupled flow-stress analysis)
47 / 86
3.4.
Numerical results
We can see that the curves obtained in axisymmetry are very similar
to the ones obtained in the plain strain, which means that modeling
the vacuum consolidation in axisymmetry with head boundary
condition carries out correctly the calculations.
Figure 50. Boundary condition
48 / 86
49 / 86
3.5.
Conclusions
If we prescribe the same head condition in axisymmetry and in plane strain, and if
we adopt properly the material data sets and perform a Consolidation analysis with
Transient groundwater flow in Advanced mode, the results given by the two methods are
very similar.
This means that vacuum consolidation can be modeled with both types
(axisymmetric and plane strain). Care should be taken however with the numerical
modeling, which needs thorough investigations about the used constitutive model, the
material data sets, the SWCC settings, the analysis type, the pore pressure generation type
and the calculation mode.
51 / 86
Generalities
During the modeling, in the finite element program PLAXIS 2D, of the vacuum
consolidation method in the two cases investigated in this paper, solutions were found to properly
carry out the calculations. Some of the analyses which are counterproductive compared to the others
can be well motivated, but still there are some considerations and settings, which were shown to
give accurate results compared to the other, but the reason of this behavior would need further
examinations.
As a synthesis of all the analyses, comparisons and investigations we can describe a specific
workflow which gives the expected result of the vacuum consolidation method in these two cases.
Based on these case studies we can claim that vacuum consolidation can be modeled in the
finite element program PLAXIS 2D, but if these methods are empirical or not, needs further
investigations.
4.2.
Methodology
Axisymmetric modeling:
Vacuum consolidation can be modeled and accurate results can be obtained during the
analysis by adopting axisymmetric project properties.
When modeling vacuum consolidation in axisymmetric model, there are a several settings
and considerations that should be followed, based on the study carried out in this paper.
As a conclusion of the case study analyzed in this paper we can claim that the most accurate
results of the vacuum consolidation method were given by modeling the numerical analysis in the
following way:
As for project properties axisymmetric model should be chosen with 15-noded
elements, which give a higher order interpolation for the displacements an this way
more accurate results, which in our case, it is very important, while we are interested
in the settlements of the soil.
In the geometrical modeling, we define the height of the model as the whole height
of the vacuum treated area, and the width is defined as the half of the distance
between the axis of two adjacent vacuum transmission pipes or the radius of the zone
of influence ( the smaller value is considered ).
As constitutive model, that should be chosen which matches the best the parameters
obtained from the geotechnical soil investigations. However, the Soft Soil model was
chosen to model the time-dependent consolidation of the soft clays, which takes into
consideration the logarithmic compression behavior.
The SWCC parameters have an important influence on the outcome of the results, so
care should be taken when choosing the soil water characteristic curves. After
analyzing the effect of the SWCC settings on the outcome of the active pore pressure
values (Table 5.) we can claim that the USDA, Van Genuchten settings for clay type
materials should be used, while this setting gives the most accurate results.
The mesh generation should be carried out with refinement in the vacuum treated
area, for a higher number of elements which lead to more accurate results.
52 / 86
Standard fixities can be generated automatically, obtaining full fixity in the x-y plane
(Ux=Uy=0).
As for the calculation type Advanced mode was chosen, while the Classical mode
gives inaccurate results. Having suction in Classical mode will result in very high
stresses as the whole suction appears in effective stresses, because the degree of
saturation (
generate the right active pore pressure state in the ground. In Advanced mode this not
a big problem as suction is always multiplied by effective degree saturation (
) which is usually lover than 1. The Advanced mode is capable of
performing fully coupled hydro-mechanical behavior of the soils. The suction pore
pressure has a total influence over the effective degree of saturation, which
relationship is called the Soil Water Characteristic Curve.
Consolidation analysis was chosen as the analysis type, while it takes into
consideration the time-effects in comparison with the Plastic analysis type which
does not take into consideration the time-effects. In vacuum consolidation the time
plays a crucial role, so it must be taken into consideration.
Transient groundwater-flow was chosen to simulate the time dependent changes in
the pore pressures, which is the only setting taking into consideration the effect of
the vacuum pressure. The Generated by phreatic level setting cannot take into
consideration the vacuum pressure only the effect of the fill loading, while always
generates the pore water pressures from the general phreatic level. The From
previous flow type generates the pore pressures based on the values from the step
right before this step, and uses those values without any change in the further
calculations (only the pressure from preloading is considered but not the suction
pressure). Steady-state groundwater-flow generation considers a permanent flow,
which means that the pore pressures are independent of time so they are generated as
steady-state pore pressures, which means that is not influenced by the vacuum
pressure.
The vacuum pressure is defined as a uniform distributed triangular water head
prescribed as a boundary condition and represents the difference between the steady
state pore water pressure and the vacuum pressure:
w*hdrain= w*z-Psteady-Pvacuum
A constant value cannot be prescribed as a boundary condition, because that would
mean that in the same time the program should take into consideration different
water heads, for each and every point, which is why the program gives inaccurate
results if the boundary condition is define like this.
53 / 86
generate the right active pore pressure state in the ground. In Advanced mode this not
a big problem as suction is always multiplied by effective degree saturation (
) which is usually lover than 1. The Advanced mode is capable of
performing fully coupled hydro-mechanical behavior of the soils. The suction pore
pressure has a total influence over the effective degree of saturation, which
relationship is called the Soil Water Characteristic Curve.
Consolidation analysis was chosen as the analysis type, while it takes into
consideration the time-effects in comparison with the Plastic analysis type which
does not take into consideration the time-effects. In vacuum consolidation the time
plays a crucial role, so it must be taken into consideration.
Transient groundwater-flow was chosen to simulate the time dependent changes in
the pore pressures, which is the only setting taking into consideration the effect of
the vacuum pressure. The Generated by phreatic level setting cannot take into
consideration the vacuum pressure only the effect of the fill loading, while always
54 / 86
generates the pore water pressures from the general phreatic level. The From
previous flow type generates the pore pressures based on the values from the step
right before this step, and uses those values without any change in the further
calculations (only the pressure from preloading is considered but not the suction
pressure). Steady-state groundwater-flow generation considers a permanent flow,
which means that the pore pressures are independent of time so they are generated as
steady-state pore pressures, which means that is not influenced by the vacuum
pressure.
The vacuum pressure is defined as a uniform distributed triangular water head
prescribed as a boundary condition on the drains and represents the difference
between the steady state pore water pressure and the vacuum pressure:
w*hdrain= w*z-Psteady-Pvacuum
A constant value cannot be prescribed as a boundary condition, because that would
mean that in the same time the program should take into consideration different
water heads, for each and every point, which is why the program gives inaccurate
results if the boundary condition is define like this.
55 / 86
5. CONCLUSIONS
This paper shows that the finite element modeling of vacuum consolidation can be carried
out with the finite element package PLAXIS 2D. However the results meet the expectations, further
studies would be necessary with more precise field measurement data, in order to calibrate a more
accurate analysis of the vacuum consolidation method.
During the analysis of the finite element modeling carried out in this paper it was shown,
that the results of the analysis are influenced by many things: the geometrical modeling of the area,
proper determination of the influence and smear zone, the constitutive model chosen for the soil, the
soil water characteristics curve, the geotechnical parameters, the calculation mode, the analysis type
and the flow settings.
As a conclusion, it was shown in this paper that the most accurate results, which match the
expectations and the field measurements, were obtained in both Plane strain and Axisymmetric
models, by performing Consolidation analysis in Advanced mode with Transient groundwater-flow
(Figure 55.).
REFERENCES
[1]-Richard Witasse, Jerome Racinais, Fanny Maucotel, Vahid Galavi, Ronald Brinkgrece, Cyril
Plomteux (2012), Finite Element Modeling of Vacuum Consolidation Using Drain Elements and
Unsaturated Soil Conditions, ISSMGE-TC211 International Symposium on Ground Improvement
IS-GI Brussels
[2]-Xueyu Geng, Buddhima Indranatna, F ASCE, Cholachat Rujikiatkamjom (2012), Analytical
Solutions for a Single Vertical Drain with Vacuum and Time-Dependent Surcharge Preloading in
Membraneless Systems., International Journal of Geomechanics, ASCE January/February 2012/27
[3]-J. P.HSI & C.H.Lee, Fully Coupled Modelling of Vacuum Consolidation
[4]-Chu, J, Yan, SW and Indraratna, B, Vacuum Preloading Techniques Recent Developments and
Applications. GeoCongress 2008, New Orleans, Geosustainability and Geohazard Mitigation GPS
178, Reddy, KR, Khire, MV, Alshawabkeh, AN (eds), 2008, 586-595.
[5]-PLAXIS 2D 2012-General Information
[6]- PLAXIS 2D 2012-Material Models
[7]- PLAXIS 2D 2012-Reference Manual
57 / 86
REZUMAT
58 / 86
LUCRARE DE DISERTAIE
Modelarea numeric a consolidrii
pmnturilor prin metoda vacuumrii
NDRUMTORI TIINIFICI:
. l. Dr. Ing. NICOLETA ILIE
Universitatea Tehnic din Cluj-Napoca
Ao.Univ.-Prof. Dipl.-Ing. Dr.techn. HELMUT F. SCHWEIGER, M. Sc.
Graz University of Technology
ABSOLVENT:
Ing. LRINCZI TNDE
59 / 86
An universitar
2012/2013
ABSTRACT
Tema acestei teze de disertaie este modelarea numeric a consolidrii pmnturilor prin
metoda vacuumrii folosind rezultatele i datele msurate pe parcursul proiectelor recent realizate.
Mecanismul de vacuumare este introdus n PLAXIS 2D, cu scopul de a simula o analiz numeric
adecvat i corect, comparnd rezultatele cu cele obinute n studiile de caz.
Teza de disertaie conine cinci pri principale:
1. Teorie, o revizuire a relaiilor empirice privind consolidarea prin vacuumare
din literatura recent.
2. Studii de caz despre dou regiuni situate pe soluri de tip argil care au fost
tratati cu consolidarea prin vacuumare (Ballina Bypass i un port de
containere la rul Cai Mep) i modelarea acestei proceduri n PLAXIS 2D un
program care utilizeaz elemente finite.
3. Comparatie ntre modelarea problemei n axisimetrie si in tensiuni plane a
problemelor.
4. Metodologia utilizat pentru modelarea consolidrii prin vacuumare, n
funcie de informaiile obinute n timpul modelrii a celor dou studii de caz.
5. Concluzii i discuii privind rezultatele.
n prima parte este descris mecanismul i scopul consolidrii prin vacuumare, urmat de
principiile utilizate pentru modelarea teoretic.
Al doilea capitol conine informaiile generale i geologiaa celor dou locuri tratate prin
vacuumare, urmat de o modelare utiliznd elemente finite i analiz numeric cu PLAXIS 2D:
introducerea geometriei i parametrilor fizici si mecanici ale solului, introducerea fazelor de
construcie i selecia setrilor corespunztoare de analiz. n timpul i dup analiz tasarea total,
presiunea activ a apelor din pori, eforturile principale efective i eforturile principale totale au fost
comparate cu cele obinute n studiile de caz.
Capitolul trei cuprinde o analiz comparativ, ntre modelul axisimetric i tensiuni plane a
sistemului de consolidare prin vacuumare, efectuatt pentru a ne asigura cu privire la exactitatea
modelrii numerice.
Capitolul al patrulea este o sintez a metodei care a fost folosit pentru a modela
consolidarea prin vacuumare.
Ultima parte cuprinde concluziile i discuiile asupra valorilor (valoarea total a tasrii,
presiunea activ a apelor din pori, eforturile principale efective i eforturile principale totale),
rezultate din analiza numeric efectuat de ctre programul de elemente finite PLAXIS 2D, i
acurateea modelului utilizat pentru introducerea mecanismului de consolidare prin vacuumare.
60 / 86
CUPRINS
ABSTRACT.2
CUPRINS.3
1. TEORIE...4
1.1.Introducere...4
1.2. Principiile i mecanismul consolidrii prin vacuumare......5
2. STUDII DE CAZ.7
2.1. J. P. His i C. H. Lee7
2.1.1. Generaliti...7
2.1.2. Geologia amplasamentului......8
2.1.3. Fazele de construcie i sistemul de consolidare8
2.1.4. Analiz numeric cu Plaxis 2D.........10
2.1.4.1. Modelare geometric..........10
2.1.4.2. Modelare geotehnic.......14
2.1.4.3. Metodologia de analiz.......14
2.1.4.4. Calcule......24
2.1.4.5. Rezultate numerice..29
2.2. Consolidare prin vacuumare cu drenuri.....33
2.2.1. Generaliti......33
2.2.2 Geologia amplasamentului .....33
2.2.3. Analiz numerica cu Plaxis 2D......34
2.2.3.1. Modelare geometric...34
2.2.3.2. Modelare geotehnic36
2.2.3.3. Metodologia de analiz........37
2.2.3.4. Calcule.......39
2.2.3.5. Rezultate numerice...40
3. COMPARAIE-AXISIMETRIEI TENSIUNI PLANE..46
3.1. Introducere.....46
3.2. Modelare geometrica si geotehnica.......46
3.3. Metodologia de analiz..........46
3.4. Rezultate numerice.....47
3.5. Concluzii..50
4. METODOLOGIA ANALIZEI NUMERICE.....51
4.1. Generaliti.51
4.2. Metodologia....51
61 / 86
5. CONCLUZII................................................................................. 55
REFERINE..56
1. TEORIE
1.1.
Introducere
1.2.
Aceast metod a fost introdus prima dat de Kjellman (1952) pentru a mbunta i
caracteristicile mecanice ale argilelor moi.
Mecanismul consolidrii prin vacuumare poate fi uor simulat folosind expresia tensiunilor
efective a lui Terzaghi (1943). n aceasta, presiunea atmosferic (Pa) nu se consider n calculul
eforturilor efective, deoarece efectul este auto-anulator. Pentru a examina principiul consolidrii
prin vacuumare, este necesar s se introduc presiunea atmosferic, Pa n calculul eforturilor
efective. [3]
Eforturile totale si presiunea apelor din pori in pmnt este dat de: [3]
st = g*h + Pa (1.1) n care: st efortul total
u = gw*h + Pa (1.2)
s efortul efectiv
s= st u
(1.3)
u presiunea apelor din pori
g greutatea proprie a pmntului
gw greutatea proprie a apei
h adncimea de la suprafaa terenului
62 / 86
(1.4)
Aa cum se arat n ecuaia (1.4), efortul efectiv a solului nu este afectat de presiunea
atmosferic. Cu toate acestea, n cazul n care presiunea atmosferic este scoas din presiunea
apelor din pori prin aplicarea a unei suciuni de vacuumare echivalent adic-Pa, creterile n
eforturile efective finale sunt datorate presiunilor atmosferice neechilibrate acionnd deasupra
solului, dup cum se arat mai jos: [3]
s= g*h - gw*h + Pa
(1.5)
Un alt principiu care ilustreaz metoda prencrcrii cu vacuumare este analogia cu resori,
descris n literatur de Kjellman (1952), Holtz (1975), Chen i Bao (1983), Chu i colab. (2000), i
Indraratnaet al. (2004)
Procesul de consolidare a solului sub suprasarcin a fost bine neles i poate fi ilustrat
folosind analogia cu resori cum se arat n figura 2(a). Pentru comoditatea explicaiei, presiunile
din figura 2 sunt date n valori absolute i Pa este presiunea atmosferic. Aa cum se arat n figura
2(a), n momentul n care o suprasarcin, p, este aplicat, excesul presiunii apelor din pori este cea
care preia ncrcrile. De aceea, n cazul solurilor saturate, excesul presiunii apelor din pori iniial,
u0, este egal cu valoarea suprasarcinii p. Treptat, excesul presiunii apelor din pori disipeaz i
nrcarea este transferat de la apa la resort ( scheletul solului ) cum este ilustrat n figura 2(a).
Cantitatea incrementului n eforturile efective este egal cu cantitatea presiunii apelor din pori
disipate, p u (Figura 2 (a)). La sfritul consolidrii, u = 0 i creterea eforturilor efective este
aceeai ca i valarea suprasarcinii, p (Figura 2 (a)). Trebuie remarcat faptul c procedeul de mai
sus nu este afectat de presiunea atmosferic, Pa. [4]
Mecanismul de prencrcre prin vacuumare poate fi, de asemenea, ilustrat folosind
analogia cu resori cum se arat n figura 2(b). Atunci cnd vacuumul este aplicat sistemul prezentat
n figura 2(b), presiunea apelor din pori se reduce. ntru ct efortul total aplicat nu se schimb,
crete efortul efectiv n pmnt. n momentul n care ncrcarea de vacuumare, u, est aplicat,
presiunea apelor din pori este nc Pa. Treptat presiunea apelor din pori se reduce i resortul ncepe
s fie comprimat, respectiv, scheletul solului ncepe s capt efort efectiv.Cantitatea incrementului
de efort efectiv este egal cu valoarea reducerii presiunii apelor din pori, u , care nu va depi
presiunea atmosferic, Pa, sau n mod normal, 80 kPa care este utilizat i n practic. [4]
Figura 2. Analogia cu resori a procesului de consolidare (a) sub suprasarcin; (b) sub
ncrcarea din vacuum. [4]
63 / 86
2.
STUDII DE CAZ
2.1.1. Generaliti
Acest studiu de caz prezint simularea comportamentului unui sol moale, tratat cu tehnica
de consolidare prin vacuumare, folosind programul geotehnic de elemente finite PLAXIS 2D.
Un rambleu lng un pod peste un pru este situat pe un sol din argil moale pn la 25 m
n grosime. Pentru a permite construcia n condiii de siguran a barajului i consolidarea rapid a
argilelor moi, consolidarea de vacuumare a fost ales ca un mijloc de mbuntire a solului. [3]
64 / 86
Total Fill
Thickness [m]
Equivalent Fill
Thickness [m]
Vacuum
Pressure [m]
1,99
1,82
-7,56
2,68
2,46
-8,02
5,4
4,68
-7,77
8,5
7,3
-7,38
8,5
6,73
-6,9
34.0 mm, care au fost instalate ntro form ptrat avnd echidistana
ntre ele de 1 m. Conductele sunt
extinse mai jos la aproximativ 20,0
m adncime. [3]
Figura 6. arat dispunerea
schematic
a
sistemului
de
vacuumare. [3]
Figura 6. Sistemul de vacuumare [3]
2.1.4.1.
Modelarea geometric
Modelarea geometric se face n programul Input, i putem s alegem ntre dou modele
geometrice: Plane strain
Axisymmetric
66 / 86
67 / 86
2.1.4.2.
Modelarea geotehnic
Modelul geotehnic folosit in analiz invers este prezentat n tabelul 2. n care valorile au
fost obinute pe baza rezultatelor investigaiilor pe teren i din analiza invers a datelor care au fost
monitorizare pe teren.Gradul de porozitate iniial, e0, este considerat a fi 2,1. [3]
68 / 86
Tabelul 2.
Modelul
geotehnic. [3]
n acest tabel: -g.sat greutatea pmntului n stare saturat
-kv=kh/2 valoarea vertical i orizontal a permeabilitilor
-Cc and Cr indiciile de incrcare rencrcare
-OCR este rata de supraconsolidare
2.1.4.3.
Metodologia de analiz
n PLAXIS 2D putem s alegem din mai multe modele constitutive pentru modelarea
materialului. Avnd n vedere c trebuie modelat un sol argilos foarte moale alegem modelul Soft
Soil.
Adresat in special pentru analiza de compresie primar a solurilor argiloase normal
consolidate, modelul Soft Soil este mai capabil de a modela acest tip de comportament dect
celelalte modele. [6]
Considernd rigiditatea tangent la o presiune de referin din testul oedometer de 100 kPa,
valorile pentru argile normal consolidate variaz ntre, Eoed = 1 la 4 MPa, n funcie de argila
considerat. Diferenele ntre aceste valori i rigiditate pentru nisipurile normal consolidate sunt
considerabile c aici avem valori ntre 10 pn la 50 MPa, cel puin pentru probe de laborator noncimentate. Prin urmare, n testul oedometric argilele normal consolidate, se comport de zece ori
mai moale dect nisipurile normal consolidate. [6]
Aceasta ilustreaz compresibilitatea extrem a solurilor moi. Cteva particulariti ale
modelului Soft Soil:
69 / 86
Considernd toate datele i toate satrile menionate mai sus i pe baza tabelului 2. Putem
deriva parametrii geotehnici ale solului care sunt necesari pentru modelul Soft Soil, i ele sunt
urmtoarele:
2.1.4.4. Calcule
Pentru modelul nostru au fost definite urmtoarele faze de construcie care vor fi introduse
n programul de calcul:
71 / 86
2.2.
2.2.1. Generaliti
Acest studiu de caz reprezint consolidarea prin vacuumare a unui zone aflate pe malul
rului Cai Mep.
Comportamentul bidimensional a unui dig aflat pe un sol moale ncorpornd drenuri
prefabricate verticale, a fost analizat cu pachetul de elemente finite PLAXIS 2D.Analiza n
elemente finite se efectueaz printr-o analiz complet cuplat de flux-stres considernd o stare
nesaturat a solului. Fora de suciune indus de vacuum (presiune negativ n porii apei) este
modelat cu ajutorul elementelor de scurgere verticale (drenuri). Pentru a simula comportarea
neliniar a straturilor moi de sol, o modelare constitutiv avansat a fost considerat. [1]
In acest studiu de caz rezultatele obinute sunt prezentate i comparate cu valorile din analiza
propus i efectuat n literatura scris. [1]
Modelare geometric
73 / 86
2.2.3.2.
Modelare geotehnic
Solul modelat are 7 straturi i un strat de umplere de nisip pe partea de sus, care este adus
pentru a construi terasamentul. Proprietile geotehnice folosite pentru modelare numeric sunt
cuprinse n tabelul 6. Toate proprietile materialului a fost definit pe baza parametrilor efectivi
(rigiditate i rezisten), i pentru toate straturile moi deargil a fost utilizat un comportament
nedrenat. [1]
74 / 86
2.2.3.3.
Metodologia de analiz
Pentru simularea fazele de prencrcare muliple a sistemului i pentru a simula interac iunea
ntre scheletul solului i apa din pori, modelul Soft Soil a fost ales pentru stratele superioare de
argil moale, iar pentru straturile inferioare impermeabile a fost adoptat modelul Mohr-Coulomb.
[1]
SETRI I MODELE HIDRAULICE
Pentru straturile superioare de argil moale setarea Undrained (A) a fost aleas, iar
condiiaDrained este utilizat pentru straturile inferioare ( stratul 3 i 4). Pentru straturile
impermeabile setarea Non-porous a fot aleas. [1]
2.2.3.4.
Calcule
(2.6)
Phase 0: Initial stress definition assuming drained behavior for all constitutive soil
layers (K0-procedure)
Phase 1: Drain installation without vacuum (Plastic analysis assuming instantaneous
loading)
Phase 2: Consolidation over 60 days (Coupled flow-stress analysis)
Phase 3: Installation vacuum at 35 kPa (Coupled flow-stress analysis with depression
applied over 1 day)
Phase 4: Consolidation over 20 days (Coupled flow-stress analysis)
75 / 86
2.2.3.5.
Phase 5: Add 2 m fill and increase vacuum depression to 65 kPa (Coupled flow
stress analysis with additional depression and loading applied over 1 day)
Phase 6: Consolidation over 60 days at 65 kPa vacuum pressure (Coupled flowstress analysis)
Phase 7: Add 2 m fill (Coupled flow-stress analysis with loading applied over 1 day)
Phase 8: Consolidation over 40 days at 65 kPa vacuum pressure (Coupled flowstress analysis)
Phase 9: Add 2.7 m fill (Coupled flow-stress analysis with loading applied over 1
day)
Phase 10: Consolidation over 110 days at 65 kPa vacuum pressure (Coupled flowstress analysis) [1]
Rezultate numerice
Pentru a putea urmri evoluia presiunilor active a apei din pori, eforturilor principale
efective i presiunilor principale totale, opt puncte Gauss au fost alese. [1]
76 / 86
77 / 86
Figura 24. Variaia presiunilor active a apelor din pori cu timpul conform literaturii [1]
78 / 86
Figure 26. Variaia presiunilor principale efective cu timpul conform literaturii [1]
79 / 86
3.
3.1.
Introducere
Pentru a vedea dac putem , ntr-adevr, baza pe soluia propus, scoatem un element de
dren din al doilea studiu de caz i modelm n axisimetrie cu triunghiuri avnd15 noduri.
Dup ce calculele au fost efectuate am comparat presiunile active a apelor din pori, i
rezultatele coincid cu cele obinute cu analiza n tensiuni plane care nseamn c amndou abordri
sunt corecte cu precizarea c la folosirea unui model axisimetric, prencrcarea trebuie modelat cu
sol i nu cu fore.
3.2.
3.3.
Rezultate numerice
3.4.
Concluzii
Indiferent de modelul folosit (axisimetrie sau tensiuni plane) se pot gsi aceai rezultate
dac este modelat corect comportarea unui dren astfel nct s ia n considerare efectul de grup a
drenurilor din care a fost scos.
80 / 86
4.
4.1.
Generaliti
During the modeling, in the finite element program PLAXIS 2D, of the vacuum
consolidation method in the two cases investigated in this paper, solutions were found to properly
carry out the calculations. Some of the analyses which are counterproductive compared to the others
can be well motivated, but still there are some considerations and settings, which were shown to
give accurate results compared to the other, but the reason of this behavior would need further
examinations.
As a synthesis of all the analyses, comparisons and investigations we can describe a specific
workflow which gives the expected result of the vacuum consolidation method in these two cases.
Based on these case studies we can claim that vacuum consolidation can be modeled in the
finite element program PLAXIS 2D, but if these methods are empirical or not, needs further
investigations.
n timpul modelrii, n programul elementelor finite PLAXIS 2D, a metodei consolidrii
prin vacumare cu cele dou cazuri investigate in aceast lucrare, soluiile alese satisfac calculele
necesare. Cteva dintre analize care sunt contraproductivi n comparaie cu altele pot fi bine
motivate, dar mai sunt cteva consideraii i setri, care au fost puse s dea rezultate precise
comparnd cu altele, dar motivul acestei comportri ar necesita alte examinri.
Ca o sintez a fiecrei analize, comparaii i investigaii, putem descrie un flux de lucru care
s ne dea rezultatele ateptate n cele dou cazuri a metodei consolidrii prin vacumare.
Bazat pe aceste cazuri de studii putem pretinde faptul, consolidarea prin vacumare poate fi
modelat n programul elementelor finite PLAXIS 2D, dar necesit alte investigaii chiar dac aceste
metode sunt empirice sau nu.
4.2.
Metodologia
Modelare axisimetric:
Vacuum consolidation can be modeled and accurate results can be obtained during the
analysis by adopting axisymmetric project properties.
When modeling vacuum consolidation in axisymmetric model, there are a several settings
and considerations that should be followed, based on the study carried out in this paper.
As a conclusion of the case study analyzed in this paper we can claim that the most accurate
results of the vacuum consolidation method were given by modeling the numerical analysis in the
following way:
Consolidare prin vacumare poate fi modelat i se poate obine i rezultate precise n cursul
analizei prin adoptarea proprietilor proiectului axisimetrice.
Cnd modelm consolidarea prin vacumare n model axisimetric, sunt cteva setri i
consideraii care ar trebuii urmate, bazat pe studiul din aceasta lucrare.
Ca o concluzie a acestei caz de studiu analizate n aceast lucrare, putem enuna c cele mai
precise rezultate a metodei consolidrii prin vacumare au fost date de modelarea analizei numerice
n urmtoarea form:
81 / 86
rezultate mai precise, care n cazul nostrum este foarte important n timp ce suntem
interesai de tasarea pmnturilor.
n modelarea geometric putem definii nlimea modelului ca nltimea total a ariei
tratate prin vacumare, i limea este definit ca jumtatea distanei dintre axele a
dou conducte de vacumre adiacente sau raza zonei de influene (valoarea mai mic
este ales).
Ca model constitutive ar trebuii ales care se potrivete cel mai bine la parametrii
obinute din ivestigaia geotecnic a pmntului. Totui modelul Pamnt Moale a
fost ales pentru modelarea consolidrii timp-dependent a argilei moale care ia n
considerare comportamentul compresiei logaritmice.
Parametrii SWCC au o influen important asupra rezultatelor, deci trebuie avut grij
cnd alegem curbele caracteristice a apei subterane. Dup analizarea efectelor a
setrilor SWCC asupra rezultatele valorilor presiunii active a porilor (Tabelul 5.)
putem efirma c setrile USDA, Van Genuchten ar trebuii folosite pentru materiale de
tip argil, deoarece aceast setare ne d rezultatele cele mai precise.
Generarea reelelor de triunghiuru ar trebuii tratat cu rafinament n aria tratat prin
vacumare pentru un numr mai mare de elemente, care conduc la rezultate mai
precise.
Rezemri standard pot fi generate automat, obinnd rezemare complet n planurile
x-y (Ux=Uy=0).
Pentru tipul calculei a fost ales Modul Avansat, n timp ce modul Clasic ne d
rezultate neprecise. Avnd suciune in modul Clasic vor rezulta eforturi foarte mari,
toat suciunea apare n efort efectiv, din cauza gradului de saturaie (
) care
este n totdeauna egal cu 1, i din cauza asta nu este posibil s generm starea corect
a presiunii active a porilor n pmnt. n Modul Avansat nu este o problem mare
deoarece suciunea este ntotdeauna multiplicat cu gradul efectiv de saturaie (
) care este mai mic dect 1 de obicei. Modul Avansat este capabil s
) care
este n totdeauna egal cu 1, i din cauza asta nu este posibil s generm starea corect
a presiunii active a porilor n pmnt. n Modul Avansat nu este o problem mare
deoarece suciunea este ntotdeauna multiplicat cu gradul efectiv de saturaie (
) care este mai mic dect 1 de obicei. Modul Avansat este capabil s
83 / 86
84 / 86
5.
CONCLUZII
85 / 86
REFERINE
[1]-Richard Witasse, Jerome Racinais, Fanny Maucotel, Vahid Galavi, Ronald Brinkgrece, Cyril
Plomteux (2012), Finite Element Modeling of Vacuum Consolidation Using Drain Elements and
Unsaturated Soil Conditions, ISSMGE-TC211 International Symposium on Ground Improvement
IS-GI Brussels
[2]-Xueyu Geng, Buddhima Indranatna, F ASCE, Cholachat Rujikiatkamjom (2012), Analytical
Solutions for a Single Vertical Drain with Vacuum and Time-Dependent Surcharge Preloading in
Membraneless Systems., International Journal of Geomechanics, ASCE January/February 2012/27
[3]-J. P.HSI & C.H.Lee, Fully Coupled Modelling of Vacuum Consolidation
[4]-Chu, J, Yan, SW and Indraratna, B, Vacuum Preloading Techniques Recent Developments and
Applications. GeoCongress 2008, New Orleans, Geosustainability and Geohazard Mitigation GPS
178, Reddy, KR, Khire, MV, Alshawabkeh, AN (eds), 2008, 586-595.
[5]-PLAXIS 2D 2012-General Information
[6]- PLAXIS 2D 2012-Material Models
[7]- PLAXIS 2D 2012-Reference Manual
86 / 86