Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Se;: eiIIenI;
an( ~eave o
overconso ic a~:ec
1500
1000'00
Eu
Cu
c BIfs-
Note
Curves NLI
illustrative
O'rien
OL
0.001
0.005 0.01
0.05
05 1.0
0.1
Normahsed
settlement
undrained
Sz/50
0.5
1.0
Introduction
Settlement at working load is usually the critical design consideration
for vertically loaded foundations on stiff overconsolidated
clays.
Foundation settlement is usually calculated by assuming that the
ground behaves as a linear elastic material. The reliability of this
calculation is mainly dependent on an appropriate choice of elastic
modulus.
However, modern laboratory testing techniques have identified the
highly non-linear stress strain characteristics of overconsolidated
clays, for example, refer to Jardine et al 1984'nd Figure 1'. This
explains the wide range of values for "linear elastic" moduli, which
have been reported in the technical literature; for example E/Cu ratios
of between 150 and 1500 have been quoted in CIRIA SP 27'. As a result
the selection of an appropriate value for a linear elastic modulus
becomes a matter of considerable engineering judgement. The recent
Ground Engineering article'xemplifies some of the difficulties that
engineers face in selecting appropriate deformation moduli.
An additional problem is that linear elasticity incorrectly predicts
the pattern of settlement adjacent to and beneath a loaded area. For
example, if total settlement of a structure is correctly predicted, settlement at depth or remote from the structure will be incorrectly predicted. In view of these problems, the applicability of linear elastic calculations for overconsolidated clays is limited. However, the alternatives to conventional linear elastic calculations, such as non-linear
finite element techniques, can be complex, expensive and time consuming, requiring high level expertise and considerable engineering
interpretation.
Hence, there is a need for a simplified method which enables the
engineer to gain an understanding of foundation deformation behaviour under loads of varying intensity. This paper describes a method
which enables the non-linear stress strain behaviour of overconsolidated clays to be modelled in a manner which is relatively simple and
is appropriate for routine design calculations. The calculations are
most conveniently undertaken by computer. however, the method is
readily amenable to hand calculation. Undrained and total settlement
(or heave) can be calculated under foundation loading of any shape and
of varying intensity using a varying ground stiffness depth profile.
0.5 >-
cc
'aCl
oi
io
1.0,
1.5
'ey:
ao
(kN/m
Sofmml
Foundation
zfm)
Formation
Reference';
geometry
250
18
3.3
137
33
agua
gie,Baca
'o
iii
Il
egal g
B=m L=BB',
220
17 5
4
e'actce ieeic
ea
o
ace
ai:
Ae
iceomc
oi
ac e
.".."'are
Ai
ac
cacao
a*eeoc
'aco"
..ca
Aoa
ua va
for the plate test on London Clay, with most settlement occurring within a depth of about 0.6 times the building width. An interesting feature
of this field data is that the building settlement increases by more than
a factor of 2.5, when bearing pressure increases by a factor of only
about 1.8. Also as bearing pressure is increased, normalised sub surface settlement becomes concentrated closer to the building foundation. Linear elastic calculations would not predict this pattern of
behaviour.
2001
PAPER
due to unloading is greater than time dependent settlement due to loading. The fundamental difference in behaviour between the development of settlement and heave is highlighted by comparing the ratio of
the end of construction movement to the time dependent movement,
R = 6u ih,d. The settlement records typically indicate R to vary between
1.4 and <2d.0. However, the records of heave indicate that R varies
between 0.4 and 0.8. Although incomplete records of time dependent
heave, the rates of heave described by Mettyear'nd Pierpointio (for
24m and 10m deep excavations in London Clay and Oxford Clay respectively) provide additional evidence of the lower deformation moduli
mobilised beneath excavations.
It is observed that compared to settlement, time dependent heave
appears to develop over significantly longer periods of time. At the
Shell Building, in central London, the rate of time dependent heave
shows little sign of decreasing even though the excavation took place
over 30 years ago, Burford 1992""-.In contrast, time dependent settlement is generally found to be complete within about five to 10 years.
i=n
(e.'v
i=i
(6)
H,)
= 1 [3o, v(A<si +
(7)
A<Tg)]H
ll
80
Qy
Den
E
E
60
P
'.3<<
Qo
40
re Heave
si
XR
40
80
120
IXX e XR
160
in
200
hwndnlondhnonolons
Sfnodlh
Lend&
@4(1976i
Indicates movement
still increasing
240
280
320
360
pressure (kN/ma)
method is
6T-6 + 6ul
Raft
Net change
Settlement
Piled raft
Xv
20'
basic considerations:
(a) the magnitude and distribution of stresses set up
in the soil mass by the foundation loading;
(b) the immediate and long term stress-strain
properties of the soil mass in both depth and lateral
extent;
(c) the linking of (a) and (b) above, in order to
and
hence
displacements,
calculate
strains,
throughout the soil mass affected by foundation
loading.
An outline of the proposed non-linear
presented below.
=~
6T
SnnoolnndanlnodMano
I)
Opondfndinoifoanoad
"r
(2)
mv-1<T'vH
n layers
mv
A<tv
(3)
H,
i
-'-"':,-":-(ef)~M:-;;~.'-:<4%~
e'=':QOdnn~(l~.-":=:-.
e:: IIIfdt)K~i~--::
a
.et
~4~~
e<<rauviec<a-ro,
.-.=='T,
'.-'.
<a<trav)::
-:
-"~~::
v<n
)sfo.=.'--,
.:-:,:-'eii
.<-,:a<dl
vn-.-'':
<,:.,".'-455nr-.
=k
(4)
F,,i
Rearranging
'=':~.-::-"4M'..-'v =.::=~;:-:,;,:-.':::::-,-!:
'i:":-::~M=-.=,':::;+::=-:=:'..
:-;:
6) = k,3<r', = k,(3<r,
H
3u,)
(6)
-:":
6<
-.'<i~~&=
-"ssa'm
.Ww~j'zYg;
The change in net vertical total stress, A<re, is calculated from conventional isotropic linear'elastic
theory (for example Poulos and Davis 1974"), Au, is
the change in equilibrium pore water pressure with<IROLINI) VNOINKKRINO
O<t POHHR
2001
29
PAPER
Dividing the compressible strata into n layers, then for layer i:
1
5u, [A(r,. - v(kirh
Normalised
+ Airh )]H,
(8)
From Equation 8:
euuut
= 5uui =
H,
distance X/R
Normaiised
1.0
3.0
2.0
4.0
5.0
0.2
[Aire - V (3(rh
ij
Arrh
(9)
)]
2i
1.0
0.4
2.0
0.6
Eu,
0.8
The undrained secant Young's modulus, Eu.,1 is assumed to be a function, only, of the vertical strain which layer i experiences. Mean effective
stress during undrained loading (or unloading) is assumed to be constant. Equation 9 has to be iterated until the vertical strain calculated for
the layer is compatible with the strain assumed for estimating
Eu i .
Following a successful iteration, the final calculated value of Eu. is then
I
the mobilised undrained secant Young's modulus for layer i, E.
a successful iteration eu,
is determined and the cumulaUVi
tive undrained vertical displacement is calculated for the compressible
3.0
1.0
b. Profiles of normalised surface settlement
adiacent to a ngid footing
4.0
Linear elastic
5.0
a. Profiles of normalised subsurface
settlement for a rigid foobng
Non-linear,
Fs =
3.3
Non-linear,
Fs =
2.0
"i(mob)'ollowing
strata:
i=n
8u
= X (euu H,)
(10)
i=i
4.0,
d NL2
d NLD2
3.0 l
2.0 L
shold
1.0
Qi0.005
0.002
0.01
0.02
0.05
0.1
0.2
0.5
1.0
2.0
scale
for average
(14)
Hence the mean effective stress during a load increment (or decrement)
for layer i may be expressed in terms of the change in vertical effective
stress for layer i as follows:
Rearranging
Equation 11:
Pa;=Po,+ ~p;
pa = po+ pr
2
(12)
(1 v')
The increment or decrement of mean effective stress, Ap', can be related to the change in vertical and horizontal effective stress as follows:
Ap:
1 (3(r + Ao
3
ht
+ 3(rh2)
(13)
Then from Equation 12, substituting for Arr'h, and r1(r', in Equation 13:
30
(15)
8(1- v)
Hence, p',. can be calculated from a knowledge of only p', and 2(rr', In
order to modify the initial drained secant Young's modulus to allow for
the increase (or decrease) in mean effective stress, the initial drained
secant Young's modulus can be pro-rated as follows:
Ec,=Eo
(17)
P oi
From Equation 17, the variation E'c. of with depth under the specified
loading can be defined. It should be noted that the magnitude of F.' is
not usually unduly sensitive to the magnitude of p', assumed.
(iROI/NI) RN(;INKRR(N('(rTOI(KR
2001
PAPER
) is adjusted to be compatible
with the average of the assumed and
calculated strain magnitudes from
Euo
Divide compressible
strata into
n layers
0
0
Input vanation
Calculate total
settlement/heave
Calculate undrained
settlement/heave
of Eu with strain
stress
p o
04-
0
'ompare
accordAnce,
t
M<id'<y Eu
in
with ~2
for layer
Calculate change
stress
06
'orlayeri, does
yes
Apply
vertical effective
depth. aa v
in
stress
Calculate settlement/heave
Sum settlement/heave
010
with
Qg-
Corrections
to
settlement/heave
point of interest
within layer
for
layers
settlement/heave
in
accordance,'ith
2
for layer
yes
Sum settlement/heave
Apply
No
Calculate settlement/heave
within layer
for
layers
13
14
15
ocTDBER 2001
calculated
is required, either:
stress changes within soil mass from appropriate elastic
solutions for structures of finite stiffness, Poulos and Davis 1974;
~ use the concept of displacement compatibility along the structure to
predict the variation of contact stress at the sub structure/soil interface.
This contact stress distribution (simplified as a series of uniformly
loaded areas of varying intensity) can then be used to calculate
within the soil mass, by using the principles of
displacements
superposition to calculate stress changes at a particular point.
A simplified flow chart which summarises the key steps in calculating both undrained and total vertical deformation by the proposed
method is presented in Figure 6.
~ predict
he published
References
1. RJ Jardiue. MJ Symes and JB Burlaud <1984). The measurement of soil stiffness in the
asia 1 apparatus. Geo tech n i 0 ue, Vol. 34. No 3 pp 323 - 340.
2. AS O'rien. C J Forbes-Kmg. PA Gildea and P Sharp (1992). Insitu stress and stiffness at
seven overcousol idated clay and weak rock sites'. Parts I to 3. Ground Eng. Vol 23 Nos. 6-8.
3. C J Padfreld and M J Sharrock (1983).Settlement of structures on clay soils. Construction
Industry Research & Information Association, Special Publication 2i, London.
4. Never mind chalk, what about the cheese. Ground Fngi neeri ng, p13, October 1999.
5 A Mnrsland and BJ Eason (19i3). hleasurement of displacements in the ground belov:
loaded plates in deep boreholes. Field Instrumentation in Geotechnical Engineering, BGS
SymposiumMayi June 1973.
6. HJ Kriegel and HH Weisuer (1973).Problems of stress-strain conditions in subsoil. Proc.
of 8th ICSMFE, Moscow Vol.2. pp.133 to 141.
7. Simous and Som (19i0). Settlement of structures on clay with particular emphasis on
London Clay. CIRIA report 22.
8. K Morton and E Au (1976), Settlement observations of eight structures in London. Proc.
tri
31
PAPER
Conf. on Settlement of Structures, Cambridge, pp183 to 203. Pentech Press. London.
9. NV Mettvear (1984). The short term behaviour of a deep cutting in London clay, '.4ISc
dissertation. Imperial College.
10. ND Pierpoint (1996). The prediction and back analysis of excavat>on behaviour in
OxfordClay'hDThesis. Sheffield University.
11.D Burford(1992) Private communication, kIarch 1992.
12. D Burford (1988). Heave of tunnels beneath the Shell Centre. London. 1939-1986.
Technical Note, Geb(ec)u>i que Vol 38, No.l. pp.136 to 137.
13. RJ Jardine, DM Potts. AB Fourie & JB Burland (1986). Studies of the influence of nonlinear stress-strain characteristics in soil-structure interaction. Gdu(echnique, Vol.36,
No.3, pp377-396.
14. Henkel (1971).The relevance of laboratory measured parameters in tield studies. Proc.
Roscoe Nlemomal Symposium. pp669 676 ( ambri<lgv. Foul is
15. HG Poulos and EH Davis(1974). Elastic solut>ons for soil an<i rock mechanics. J vyfley.
16. EN Fox (19J8).The mean elastic settlement of a unit'ormly loaded area at depth belo>v
the ground surface. Proc 2nd ICShIFE, Rotterdam
17. JH Burland (1969).Discussion on Session A. Proc. Conf. on in situ investigations in soils
and rocks. Bmtish Geotechnical Society. London.
18. RA Fraser aml LJ Wardle (1976). Numerical analyi ot'<octangular rafts on layered
foundat>ons. (Ieo(echnivue, Vol.26. Nova pp.613 to 630.
19. JA Hooper (1976). Elastic settlement of a circular rett in a<ihesive contact <ith a
transverselv isotropic medium. Geo(echni<(ue. Vol.z >, No/L
Notation
E
H,
<r
<r
>urv
A<t'v
>>u,.
<rbo
A<rh,
3<rhv
3<rh
1>
a<rbv'>I
K
Po
P,,
P(
Ap'
P.
C
Cn>
a,b
c
(<)
E
Eu
32
o s.
2<r b
"i(ca I )
>(n>ob)
Ee.
Eo.i
E'',
K
E'
<.
E (-i)
)(mob)
E'vd
E'v,
k,
euv>
7
Su
Su.
Su)
F>T
Ss
F>o
Sx
D
Z
R
L
SPT N
2001